[Houston Archaeological and Historical Commission on December 12, 2024.]
[00:00:15]
I AM GONNA CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.
IT IS THURSDAY, DECEMBER 12TH, 2024.
TODAY'S MEETING OF THE HOUSTON ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION.
I AM COMMISSION CHAIR DAVID EK TO VERIFY WE HAVE A QUORUM OF AT LEAST SEVEN.
UM, THE VICE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
UH, SORRY, THE CHAIR IS PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER DUBOSE? NOT HERE.
COMMISSIONER BLAKELY IS NOT HERE.
COMMISSIONER VEDA IS NOT HERE.
COMMISSIONER COSGROVE PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER STAAVA IS NOT PRESENT.
COMMISSIONER COUCH AND PLANNING DIRECTOR TRAN PRESENT.
UH, I'D LIKE TO MENTION, UM, AS PART OF MY REPORT THAT THE MEETING CAN BE VIEWED ON HTV, ALTHOUGH VIRTUAL WILL PARTICIPATION OPTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE.
MEETINGS START ABOUT A MINUTE OR TWO AFTER THE SCHEDULED TIME TO ALLOW THE HTV BROADCAST TO GO LIVE.
SPEAKERS, IF YOU WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON AN ITEM, PLEASE FILL OUT THE SPEAKER'S FORM BEFORE THE ITEM IS CALLED AND TURN IT INTO THE STAFF NEAR THE FRONT DOOR.
THE SPEAKER SPEAKER'S RULES ARE POSTED ON THE AGENDA AND ARE AT MY DISCRETION.
APPLICANTS MAY OPEN AND SPEAK FOR THREE MINUTES.
YOU MAY ALSO BE RECOGNIZED TO CLOSE WITH AN ADDITIONAL TWO MINUTES.
I MAY CALL ON YOU FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO ANSWER QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS.
OTHER PUBLIC SPEAKERS MAY SPEAK ONE TIME UP TO TWO MINUTES.
WHEN I RECOGNIZE YOU TO SPEAK.
PLEASE NOTE FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION OF OF CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS AFTER STAFF'S INITIAL PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMISSION MEMBERS PLEASE HOLD YOUR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF UNTIL OUR DELIBERATIONS, UM, FOR OUR DELIBERATIONS UNTIL AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND WITH THAT, UM, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIR AND HISTORIC COMMISSION MEMBERS.
I AM VON TRAN, SECRETARY OF THIS COMMISSION AND DIRECTOR OF THIS DEPARTMENT.
I'M PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE DESIGNATION OF FIVE HISTORIC PROPERTIES, INCLUDING FOUR, FOUR PROTECTED LANDMARKS AND ONE LANDMARK.
THE PROPERTIES ARE ALL LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF HOUSTON AND SPAN THREE CITY COUNCIL DISTRICTS.
YESTERDAY'S COUNT, UH, YESTERDAY'S COUNCIL APPROVALS BRING THE CITY'S LANDMARK INVENTORY TO 307 LANDMARKS AND 182 PROTECTED LANDMARKS.
AS YOU MAY KNOW, THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF DESIGNATIONS.
A LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROTECTS RESOURCES IN THE FOLLOWING WAYS.
ANY BUILDING DESIGNS, ALTERATIONS, ADDITIONS, AND MAINTENANCE TO THE BUILDING STRUCTURE OR SITE MUST FOLLOW THE CITY OF HOUSTON HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
THE DESIGNATION DOES NOT PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT PROTECTION FROM DEMOLITION OR INAPPROPRIATE ALTERATIONS.
HOWEVER, A PROTECTED LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROVIDES SIGNIFICANT PROTECTION AGAINST DEMOLITION AND ARE ELIGIBLE TO BE NOMINATED AS SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS.
IN CLOSING, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, YOU CAN CALL THE HIS, THE HOUSTON OFFICE OF PRESERVATION HOTLINE AT 8 3 2 3 9 3 6 5 5 6 OR VISIT OUR WEBSITE@HOUSTONPLANNING.COM.
THIS CONCLUDES MY DIRECTOR'S REPORT.
UH, I BELIEVE WE DO NOT HAVE A MAYOR, A MAYOR'S LIAISON REPORT TODAY.
SO WE WILL MOVE ON FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE NOVEMBER 7TH, 2024 HAHC MEETING.
MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS, HAVE YOU HAD A MOMENT TO REVIEW THE MINUTES IN YOUR PACKET?
[00:05:02]
ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? IF THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES? COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON MOVES TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES.IS THERE A SECOND JONES SECONDS.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? OKAY.
WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM A CONSIDERATION OF AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, APPLICATIONS FOR CONSENT.
THE HHC CONSENT ITEMS FOR DECEMBER 12TH, 2024.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR, COMMISSIONERS AND THE PUBLIC.
I'M STAFF MEMBER TERRENCE JACKSON.
STAFF RECOMMENDS THE FOLLOWING ITEMS FOR ACTION PER STAFF.
RECOMMENDATIONS IN ONE MOTION ITEM A 2 1 9 0 7 DECATUR STREET ALTERATION IN THE OLD SIX WARD HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION DENIAL ITEM A 3 7 0 7 ARLINGTON STREET ALTERATION IN HOUSTON HEIGHTS, SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION DEFERRAL ITEM A 4 1 0 2 6 FUGATE ALTERATION OF DOORS AND WINDOWS IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ITEM, A 6 1 1 1 5 WEST GARDNER STREET, ALTERATION OF WINDOWS AND SIDING IN THE HIGH FIRST WARD.
HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM A 7 18 19 HEIGHTS BOULEVARD ALTERATION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS EATS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION.
APPROVAL ITEM, A 8 1 3 1 4 2 LANE STREET ALTERATION, ADDITION OF DOORS AND INDOORS IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL ITEM, A 9 1 3 4 1 AUSTIN ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION.
APPROVAL ITEM EIGHT TEN ONE THREE FOUR ONE AUSTIN STREET, NEW CONSTRUCTION OF A GARAGE IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS WEST HISTORIC DISTRICT.
APPROVAL ITEM, A 11 6 10 MARSHALL STREET ALTERATION SLASH EDITION IN AUDUBON PLACE.
RECOMMENDATION DEFERRAL ITEM A 12 5 0 5 EAST NINTH STREET ALTERATION EDITION IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SOUTH HISTORIC DISTRICT APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS ITEM A 13 1 1 1 5 EAST 11TH STREET, ALTERATION OF DOORS, WINDOWS, AND AWNING IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
ITEM A 14 3 1 1 5 BOHAM STREET, A NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE WOODLAND HEIGHTS HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION, APPROVAL AND ITEM A 16 6 0 9 SABINE OR 18, OR TO BE CONSIDERED AS 1802 STATE STREET, A REVISION IN THE OLD SIX SIXTH WARD.
HISTORIC DISTRICT RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REQUESTS APPROVAL FOR OF ALL STAFF.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE PROCEEDING ITEMS WE ARE REQUESTING ITEMS A ONE, A FIVE, AND A 15 BE CONSIDERED INDIVIDUALLY.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, ARE THERE ANY ITEMS ON THE CONSENT AGENDA THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PULL FOR INDIVIDUAL, UH, CONSIDERATION? I JUST ONE COMMENT.
I THINK, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT ITEM NUMBER 6 1 1 1 5, GARDNER STREET IS NOT IN THE HY FIRST WARD.
MAY I, IT IT SHOWS ON THE CHART TO BE IN NOR HILL, IS THAT CORRECT? YES, IT'S IN NOR HILL.
AT THIS TIME I'M GONNA OPEN, UH, THE PUBLIC HEARING AND JUST ASK MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.
I HAVE A FEW PEOPLE, UH, WHO HAVE SIGNED UP TO SPEAK FOR SOME OF THESE ITEMS, UH, IN PARTICULAR ITEMS NUMBER FOUR, UH, NUMBER SEVEN, NUMBER SIX, NUMBER 12, AND NUMBER 13.
IF YOU ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON ONE OF THOSE ITEMS AND YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION THAT STAFF HAS, UH, DETERMINED, YOU MAY AT THIS TIME ANNOUNCE YOURSELF.
AND THE, THE NUMBER, IF YOU TO PULL
[00:10:01]
THIS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION IS, DOES ANYONE WANT TO, TO DO THAT? SHE, SHE SAID 13.AND VIRGINIA, YOU ALSO SIGNED UP FOR ITEM NUMBER FOUR, CORRECT? UM, I, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK.
SO WHAT I HAVE RIGHT NOW, I'LL READ, I'LL READ THE LIST THAT I HAVE.
THE CONSENT AGENDA WOULD BE ITEM STARTING WITH ITEM 2 19 0 7 DECATUR STREET.
ITEM 3, 7 0 7 ARLINGTON STREET.
ITEM 4 1 0 2 6 FUGATE STREET, ITEM 6 1 1 1 5 WEST GARDNER STREET IN NOR HILL.
ITEM SEVEN 1-819-HEIGHTS BOULEVARD.
ITEM 8 1 3 1 4 2 LANE STREET, ITEM 9 1 3 4 1 ALSTON STREET, ITEM TEN ONE THREE FOUR ONE ALSTON STREET, ITEM 11 6 1 MARSHALL STREET, ITEM 12 5 0 5 EAST NINTH STREET, ITEM 14 3 1 1 5 AMP STREET.
AND ITEM 16 6 0 9 SABINE, AKA 1802 STATE STREET.
UM, I'M GONNA CLO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
UH, COMMISSION MEMBERS, UH, IS THERE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE, UH, SLATE OF THE REVISED CONSENT AGENDA AND ALSO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF AS PUBLISHED COSGROVE? SO MOVED.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? MOTION PASSES.
AND WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION.
UH, ROMAN, THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE, CONTACTED ME A FEW MINUTES AGO AND HE'S TRYING TO MAKE IT HERE AND HE HAS NOT ARRIVED YET.
I WOULD, CAN WE TAKE, UH, INSTEAD GO TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA? I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU MAKE THAT.
DO I NEED TO MAKE A MOTION? I'M, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT.
UM, YOU, YOU CAN JUST TAKE THEM OUT OF ORDER.
SO WE'LL LET US START WITH, UM, ITEM FIVE.
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON TAYLOR VALLEY.
I SUBMIT ITEM A FIVE AT 79 54 GLEN VISTA IN THE GLENBROOK VALLEY HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN ALL THE WORK COMPLETED ON THE CURRENT HOME.
THIS WAS ORIGINALLY A CONTRIBUTING MID-CENTURY MODERN HOME CONSTRUCTED CIRCA 1954, THAT HAS, THAT HAS SINCE UNDERGONE EXTENSIVE UNPERMITTED WORK DATING BACK TO DECEMBER, 2021.
UNDER WHAT HCA CAUGHT SHOWS AS A PREVIOUS OWNER, INCLUDING NEW TEXTURED SIDING WITH A SIX INCH TRIVIAL, A NEW FRONT FACADE, A NEW ROOF LINE, A GARAGE CONVERSION INTO A BEDROOM, AND NEW FENESTRATIONS INCLUDING NEW VINYL WINDOWS AND DOORS.
THE NEW OWNER WANTS THIS TO REMAIN PERTAINING TO ENFORCEMENT.
STAFF HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH TWO OF THE THREE INSPECTORS, ONE VIA EMAIL, WHICH CAN BE FOUND ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE REPORT, AND ONE VIA PHONE CALL THAT HAVE VISITED, DOCUMENTED AND ISSUED THE RED TAGS FOR THIS SITE.
AND WE WERE TOLD THAT PROPER ACTION WAS TAKEN WITH THE 25 RED TAGS ISSUED, AND THAT FOR EVERY FOUR VISITS THAT DO NOT GET A RESPONSE, A CITATION IS ISSUED.
ACCORDING TO HCA, THERE WAS A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP TO THE CURRENT OWNER IN MAY, 2023, WHERE BASED ON DOCUMENTATION FROM OUR INTERNAL DATABASE, WE CAN INFER THAT THE WORK WAS COMPLETED OR AT THE VERY BEST LE AT THE VERY LEAST NEAR COMPLETION WHEN THE CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP OCCURRED.
BOTH THE AGENT AND INVESTIGATORS STATE THAT THIS WAS THE DOING OF THE PREVIOUS OWNER AND THAT THE CURRENT OWNER IS TRYING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF A COA AND ISSUANCE OF A COR TO REFRAME THE ROOF TO ITS ORIGINAL FORM AND TO REBUILD THE FRONT ELEVATION AND MATCH THE ORIGINAL CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THE APPLICANTS ARE HERE FOR ANY, ANY QUESTIONS.
AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
UM, I'M GONNA START BY OPENING UP THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM.
[00:15:01]
ITEM FIVE.SO I HAVE ONE SPEAKER THAT IS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK AND IS ANNA SOPHIA GOMEZ.
YOU, YOU CAN APPROACH THE, UM, THE MICROPHONE AND PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
MY NAME IS ANNA SOPHIA GOMEZ, AND I'M REPRESENTING MS. JANA IN, UM, THIS PROPERTY 79 54 GLEN VISTA.
AS IT WAS MENTIONED BEFORE, SHE'S A NEW OWNER AND, UM, SHE ACQUIRED THIS PROPERTY BACK IN MAY, 2023.
AND SINCE THEN, THIS RECORDS AT THE PERMITTING CENTER THAT SHE WAS TRYING TO GET A PERMIT FOR EVERYTHING THAT WAS DONE.
SHE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, GETTING THE CERTIFICATE OF A PROPERTY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS IN THE HISTORICAL DEPARTMENT.
AND, UM, UM, I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE INSPECTOR HERARDO, UM, HERARDO MURILLO, HE'S THE LAST INSPECTOR THAT HAS BEEN PUT, UH, PUT NOTES IN THE SYSTEM AND, UM, HE'S BEEN SAYING THAT EVER SINCE SHE GOT THE PROPERTY WORK HAS BEEN STOPPED.
SO IT WAS PRIOR TO HER OWNERSHIP THAT EVERYTHING WAS DONE.
AND, UM, WE ARE PROPOSING TO, IF POSSIBLE, TO KEEP THE CHANGES AS IT IS RIGHT NOW AND GET THE PROPER PERMITS.
I HAVE THE DRAWINGS, UH, WITH THE WORK PROPOSING, YOU KNOW, TO KEEP IT.
AND, UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT CONSIDERED.
UH, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKER FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS? CAN I, CAN I ASK, UM, MAKE SURE JACKSON, WHEN, WHEN MS. GARZA PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? IT WAS NOT COMPLETE.
I MEAN, IT WAS STILL UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
IT WAS ALREADY AS IT IS RIGHT NOW.
SO IT WAS COMPLETE, IT WAS COMPLETED.
AND THE PRO PREVIOUS OWNER DID NOT SHARE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT THE RED TAGS OR ANY LEGAL, I I'M CONCERNED THAT THERE WAS, AND I'M GONNA LOOK TO COMMISSIONER COSGROVE TO SEE IF HE CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON ANY TRANSFER OF PROPERTY THAT HAS LIENS AGAINST IT OR RED TAGS.
THAT HAS NOTHING TO YEAH, HE DID NOT SHARE ANYTHING THAT WAS GOING ON WITH THE PROPERTY.
SHE WENT TO COURT TO TRY TO REMEDIATE AND, AND SHE PAID A FINE ALSO AND SHE THOUGHT THAT WAS IT AND JUST TO GET THE PERMITS AND CONTINUE, YOU KNOW, WITH, UH, BECAUSE THE INTERIOR REMODEL IS NOT DONE.
EVERYTHING IS ONLY THE OUTSIDE THAT IS IS COMPLETED.
SO SHE KNEW THAT THERE WERE RED TAGS ON THE PROPERTY WHEN SHE, IN ORDER TO GET WELL, SHE SAW THE RED TAG THERE BECAUSE IT'S, BUT NOT BEFORE SHE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY? NO.
UM, SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF, OF ALL THE PROBLEMS THE PROPERTY HAD SINCE 2021, THEY, WHEN THEY STARTED DOING THE WORK AND UH, SHE JUST GOT IT ON 2023 AND IS WHEN, WHEN SHE TRIED TO GET THE PERMITS IS WHEN SHE FOUND OUT THAT SHE HAD ALL THESE CITATIONS.
SO SHE WENT TO COURT AND TRIED TO FIX IT.
I'M NOT AWARE OF HOW MUCH SHE PAID, BUT SHE DID MADE A PAYMENT AND SHE THOUGHT THAT WAS COMPLETED AND THAT WAS DONE AND JUST CONTINUED WITH THE PERMITS, UH, THE PERMITTING CENTER AND GET IT TO CONTINUE WORKING ON THE HOUSE.
FOR THE INTERIOR REMODEL, HAS THE, HAS MS. GARZA BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER, THE PERSON SHE BOUGHT THE HOME FROM? I AM NOT AWARE OF THAT.
NO, SHE HAS NOT BEEN IN CONTACT WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER.
SO, UH, WHEN THE CURRENT OWNER, UH, BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, DID SHE BUY DIRECTLY FROM THE SELLER AT THE TIME? UH, OR DID SHE HAVE REPRESENTATION LIKE A REAL ESTATE AGENT? I DID.
I WENT THROUGH A REAL ESTATE AGENT, A REAL ESTATE AGENCY.
SO I GUESS MY QUESTION THEN, NOW IF I CAN ASK A QUESTION TO STAFF, I HEARD BRIEFLY THAT THEY WERE 25 RED TAGS ON THIS PROPERTY.
AND ALL THIS IS WAS BEFORE THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP? SO ABOUT, I WANNA SAY, UM, ACTUALLY HAVE IT WRITTEN DOWN BY INSPECTOR.
SO FROM ABOUT THE 20, ABOUT 22 OR SO RED TAGS OR 20 SOMETHING RED TAGS APPROXIMATELY WERE THE ORIGINAL OWNERS.
THERE HAD BEEN SOME SINCE, SINCE IT OBVIOUSLY HASN'T BEEN, YOU KNOW, RECTIFIED YET SINCE WE'RE HERE NOW.
BUT, UM, MOST OF THE RED TAGS, THE BULK OF THE RED TAGS WAS THE PREVIOUS OWNERS.
SO HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE PROPERTY? YES.
WERE THERE THOSE 22 RED TAGS PLASTERED ON THE WINDOWS? UM, THEY SEEMED LIKE THEY'VE BEEN TAKEN DOWN, BUT I THINK, UM, TERRANCE WAS, HE WAS WITH ME, UM, STAFFERS AND TERRANCE, UM, THERE WAS STILL ONE ON THE WINDOW, I BELIEVE AT
[00:20:01]
LEAST OTHER ONE THEY WERE.OH, THE, UM, OTHER ONES WERE ON THE WINDOWS THAT WERE REPLACED.
BUT YEAH, BECAUSE THERE WAS, I THINK THERE WAS AT LEAST ONE OR TWO IN THE WINDOW WHENEVER WE WENT, I BELIEVE.
SEE, THE, THE POINT IS THAT I WANT TO FIND OUT, MY POINT IS THAT IF THE CURRENT OWNER ONLY SAW ONE RED TAG, SHE WOULD NOT BE SO WORRIED IF SHE DID NOT SEE THE OTHER 24.
IT'S BECAUSE THE WINDOWS WERE ALREADY REPLACED WHEN SHE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.
AND RIGHT NOW IT IS ONE TAG POSTED ON THE NEW WINDOW, AND I THINK IT'S THE MOST RECENT ONE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T GOT THE PERMITS YET.
SO THE INSPECTORS, THEY CONTINUE DOING FOLLOW UPS ON THE DIRECT TAG.
SO EVERY TIME THEY GO AND THERE'S NO PERMITS, THEY PUT ANOTHER TAG.
BUT WHO REPLACED THE WINDOWS? THE CURRENT OWNER? PREVIOUS OWNER.
THE PREVIOUS OWNER WHEN THEY WERE COMPLETING THE, THE REMODEL.
FOR THE, FOR THE NEWS SPEAKER, COULD YOU RE UH, RE COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND ADDRESS THE COMMISSION? THANK YOU.
UH, MY NAME IS JANA GARZA AND GOOD AFTERNOON TO THE ENTIRE COMMISSION BOARD IS, I DON'T KNOW IF I SAID THAT CORRECTLY, BUT I JUST WANNA STATE, I PURCHASED THIS HOME FROM A REALTOR, REALTOR TO REALTOR, UH, IN MAY.
I WENT TO THE PROPERTY DURING JULY AND THERE, THERE HAD NEVER BEEN ANY RED TAGS BEFORE ON THE DOOR.
THERE WAS NOTHING POSTED WHEN I WENT TO SEE THE PROPERTY BEFORE I PURCHASED IT.
I NEVER KNEW THAT THERE WERE ANY ISSUES WITH IT.
I MEAN, THE REALTORS DIDN'T DIDN DISCLOSE ANY OF THAT INFORMATION.
UM, AFTER THE PURCHASE, WHILE I HAD GONE BACK TO IT ONCE, A GENTLEMAN FROM THE CITY OF HOUSTON PULLED UP AND GAVE US A TAG.
SO THEN HE INFORMED US THAT THERE, THAT THIS HOUSE HAD BEEN RED TAGGED MANY TIMES BEFORE.
SO I CONTACTED THE, UH, I DON'T KNOW, I GET WHERE, WHERE YOU SUBMIT, UH, CERTAIN PLANS.
AND, UM, I WENT TO COURT IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR AND THE GENTLEMAN THAT HAD ISSUED THE TICKETS TO US ALSO SHOWED UP THERE AT THAT TIME.
AND, UM, I FIGURED IT WAS OKAY SINCE, UM, HE HAD SHOWN UP.
AND, AND THE JUDGE AT THAT TIME HAD, YOU KNOW, DISMISSED THOSE TICKETS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T PERTAIN TO ME.
SO I'M JUST HERE 'CAUSE I WANNA MOVE FORWARD TO BUILDING THIS HOME.
I THINK THE HOUSE IS VERY PRETTY AS IT STANDS, IT, IT BLENDS IN WITH THE OTHERS, BUT WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE, I JUST WOULD LIKE FOR IT TO GET GOING SO THAT WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.
AND REGARDING THE LAST TAG, IT WAS POSTED IN JULY, I THINK 26TH.
THAT'S THE ONE THAT IS POSTED ON THE WINDOW RIGHT NOW.
OKAY, SO I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, I'LL REOPEN IF I NEED TO, BUT I GUESS COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS THE VERY FIRST TIME I'VE EVER SEEN THIS HAPPEN BEFORE IN ANY DISTRICT, UM, UM, WITH 25 RED TAGS.
SO, UM, AND I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GET THROUGH A REALTOR PROCESS WITH EVERYTHING DISCLOSED.
I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S A LAWSUIT HERE, UM, BETWEEN THE PARTIES ANYHOW, BUT, UM, BUT THIS IS A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY.
THESE WERE THE WINDOWS THAT THE TAGS WERE ON, WERE CONTRIBUTING WINDOWS.
AND, UM, TODAY THE HOUSE IS UN RUN UNRECOGNIZABLE TO, TO WHAT IT WAS.
I WANTED TO SAY THAT IF, UH, IF IT'S POSSIBLE, I KNOW THE GARAGE WAS CONVERTED INTO A LIVING SPACE.
UH, IF WE CAN KEEP IT, AS YOU KNOW, LIVING SPACE IS JUST PUT LIKE A FAKE GARAGE, UH, PRETENDING THAT IT'S A GARAGE AS WELL, JUST FOR THE FACADE.
UM, IT, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT IN CONSIDERATION AS WELL.
I, I UNDERSTAND, UH, THERE'S SOME LARGE, MUCH LARGER ISSUES, I THINK BEFORE THE COMMISSION NONETHELESS, BECAUSE, UM, THE COMMISSION IS HERE TO REPRESENT THE RESOURCE AND IT'S ITS PLACE IN THE, IN THE COMMUNITY THERE IN LIMERICK VALLEY.
UH, THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS, UM, COMMISSIONER JACKSON, COMMISSIONER MCNEIL.
IS THERE ANY WAY TO TRACK DOWN THE, THE OWNER WHO ACTUALLY DID ALL THIS WORK
[00:25:01]
AND PENALIZE THE PERSON WHO'S RESPONSIBLE? I, I DO NOT KNOW.I DID FORWARD THIS REQUEST OVER TO PROSECUTION, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF, I HAVE NOT GOTTEN A RESPONSE BACK ABOUT WHAT THEY CAN DO TO FOLLOW UP WITH THAT.
'CAUSE THAT WAS, THAT WAS ONE OF STAFF'S CONCERNS AS WELL.
I HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION ON COMMISSIONER MCNEIL.
IF, IF THE, IF THE, UH, PREVIOUS OWNER IS LOCATED, UH, FOUND, AND, UM, IS THERE A POSSIBILITY THAT THE CURRENT OWNER WILL HAVE TO BRING IT BACK TO WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE, BUT THEN BILL THE PREVIOUS OWNER FOR THE WORK DONE, IS THAT A, SOMETHING THAT IS DOABLE, THEY MAY HAVE A PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST THE PREVIOUS OWNER FOR THOSE COSTS? YEAH, THEY CAN TAKE A, THEY CAN, THEY CAN.
I MEAN, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY.
COMMISSIONER CURRY, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? I THINK I ALSO HAVE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION.
I'LL ASK IT MS. MICKELSON, AND, AND IT'S OPEN TO ANYONE, AND NORMALLY I WOULDN'T ASK IT, BUT THIS ISN'T, UH, TYPICAL IN ANY WAY, AND I'M SORRY IF I MISSED IT IN THE PRESENTATION, TAYLOR, BUT, UH, WHERE IS THIS PROJECT WITH, WITH ITS INITIAL PERMITTING, IF ANY, WAS THIS, WAS ANY OF THIS WORK EVER PERMITTED THROUGH THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS? WAS IT ALL BOOTLEGGED? UM, WHEN WE LOOKED IN THE INTERNAL DATABASE, UM, THERE WEREN'T ANY PERMITS THAT WERE ISSUED THERE.
SO WE CAN TAKE ANY ACTION WHEN WE WANT TO, BUT IT'S NOT LEGAL FOR IT TO BE STANDING REGARDLESS OF THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION.
AS FAR AS I KNOW, KIM
NONE OF IT IS NECESSARILY SAFE OR APPROVED BY THE CITY OF HOUSTON TO BE STANDING AND TO BE OCCUPIED OR TO BE OCCUPIED.
SO ALL OF THAT IS, IS BEYOND US.
WELL, YOU STILL HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THE DESIGN AND ISSUING A C OF R TO BRING IT BACK TO WHATEVER, I GUESS.
YEAH, BUT I, I FURTHER POINT IS THAT THERE, THERE ARE EVEN LARGER ISSUES THAN THAT ABOUT LIFE SAFETY.
THERE MAY BE REGARDLESS OF, OF WHAT WE AS A COMMISSION FEEL ABOUT THE ISSUE OF OUR PUR CORRECT.
AND IF I'M STILL GOT THE MIC, I'M HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
I ACTUALLY A QUESTION
ANY MORE QUESTION? COMMISSIONER JONES, PLEASE.
TAYLOR, HOW MUCH OF THE HISTORIC FABRIC IS LEFT ON THE FACADE OF THIS HOUSE? UM, PROBABLY NONE.
I HAVE A, A QUESTION, MR. COUCH.
SO SHE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY TWO YEARS AGO AND WE'RE JUST NOW HEARING ABOUT IT.
DO, DO YOU KNOW WHY IT'S TAKING SO LONG TO GET TO US? UM, I'M ACTUALLY NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.
UM, I SAW AGAIN, THE, UM, CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP WAS MAY OF 2023.
UM, I BELIEVE ROMAN MIGHT HAVE SOME INSIGHT ON THIS BECAUSE HE RECOGNIZES THE BUILDING.
SO COMMISSIONER, UH, THE, UH, THIS IS ROMAN MCALLEN AND PRESERVATION STAFF.
HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN? WELL, A BUILDING CAN GET RED TAGGED AND GET RED TAGGED AND GET RED TAGGED, BUT IF WE DON'T HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WE DON'T GET HERE.
UM, THAT'S THE BEST I CAN DO ON THAT.
I, I, WE RECEIVED MANY CALLS ON THIS BUILDING OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, OR I HAVE FIELDED A FEW WHEN IT WAS FOR SALE PEOPLE ASKING ABOUT IT, WHAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN TO IT.
AND I SAID, WELL, MOST LIKELY YOU'RE GONNA HAVE A, TO PUT SOME OF THAT MATERIAL BACK, UH, THAT'S GONNA NEED A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION.
BUT, UH, IN SHORT ANSWER, UNLESS, UH, I BELIEVE THAT YOU COULD RED TAG AND RED TAG AND RED TAG, BUT UNTIL WE GET AN APPLICATION IN OUR OFFICE FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, WE HAVE NOTHING TO ACT ON.
UH, UH, I HAVE A, ACTUALLY A QUESTION FOR YOU MR. CHAIR AND ALSO FOR MS. MICKELSON LOOKING AT THE PAGE, UH, FOUR OF 26.
BETWEEN PICTURE ONE AND PICTURE THREE AT THE BOTTOM, THIS IS TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT HOUSES.
IS THERE A WAY TO THEN, YOU KNOW, FOR THE, EVEN IF, IF I WISH THAT THE THING TO BE RESTORED, YOU'RE TA TALKING ABOUT REALLY TEARING DOWN THE NEW HOUSE AND REBUILDING AN OLD ONE OR LOOKS LIKE OLD.
IS THERE A WAY TO THEN DECLASSIFY THIS HOUSE AS CONTRIBUTING AND, AND THEN, UH, REMOVE
[00:30:01]
IT FROM THE REGISTER OF A CONTRIBUTING HOUSE AT ALL? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.UM, I THINK THE RECOGNITION FROM STAFF IS TO, UH, REFRAME THE ROOF, TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL ROOF AND TO PUT BACK WHAT WOULD BE NEW WINDOWS TO MATCH LARGELY MATCH THE OPENING AND LIGHT PATTERN OF THE HOME ITSELF.
UM, YEAH, BUT, AND, AND I'M, I'M SAYING, AND IF THAT WERE DONE, I, I BELIEVE IT WOULD STILL REMAIN A CONTRIBUTING PROPERTY.
UM, I MEAN, FOR INSTANCE, LIKE IF A PROJECT HAD A FIRE AND THE ROOF BURNED AND THE FRONT BURNED, I CAN THINK OF A CHURCH IN FRANCE THAT HAD THIS ISSUE RECENTLY.
AND, YOU KNOW, I WOULD STILL SAY THAT, THAT IT'S STILL A CONTRIBUTING CHURCH IN FRANCE.
AND SO I WOULD, I WOULD, I WOULD THINK THAT AS, AS LONG AS THE C OF R IS, IS, IS ACTED UPON IN PUT BACK PER THE RECOMMENDATION, IT WOULD STILL BE CONTRIBUTING.
BUT I MEAN, I I, I WOULD LOOK FOR LEGAL TO BOLSTER THAT, BUT, UM, BUT THIS, I MEAN, THIS IS THE MOST EXTREME CASE I'VE EVER SEEN OF ANY DISTRICT ON MY TIME.
AND COMMISSIONER COSGROVE AND I, AND I HAVE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME.
SO, UM, AND IT WAS A VERY DISTINCTIVE HOUSE.
IT, IT WASN'T LIKE A RANCH THAT BECAME A DIFFERENT RANCH.
LIKE IT WAS A VERY DIFFERENT HOUSE, UH, MID-CENTURY.
AND NOW IT LOOKS TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
I MEAN, IT'S UN IT'S UNRECOGNIZABLE UNLESS YOU KNEW THE, THE BACKSTORY.
FOR ME, THE ISSUE IS EVEN MORE, UH, MORE AUGMENTED IN THE FACT THAT THE, THE, UH, THE CARPORT NOW BECAME LIVING SPACE.
SO IF I, FOR ONE, WANTED IT TO BE RESTORED, I WOULD DEMAND THAT THE LIVING SPACE BE REMOVED BECAUSE THAT HOUSE WAS NEVER BUILT LIKE THAT.
BUT THEN NO, ON LISTENING TO THE APPLIED, MAYBE THE EASIER WAY OUT IS TO LET THEM THEN NOT BE PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, UH, AND, AND, AND REMOVE THAT HOUSE AS PART OF IT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO STRUGGLE FOR GRAB STRAWS HERE RIGHT NOW.
MY CONCERN WITH THAT POSITION IS JUST THAT HOW COULD YOU HAVE A DISTRICT IF NOTHING, IF NOTHING, THERE'S NO, NOTHING CAN BE SAVED IF EVERY JUST, YOU JUST DO WHAT YOU WANT.
AND THAT'S, THERE WOULD BE NO DISTRICT, THERE WOULD BE NOTHING LEFT.
UM, YEAH, SO, UM, LIKE I SAID, WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF.
I MEAN, MY EXPERIENCE WITH SALES THROUGH REALTORS IS, YOU KNOW, THE FOLKS WHO SAILING HAVE TO CERTIFY CERTAIN FACTS.
THEY SIGN THAT IF THEY ARE FRAUDULENT IN THAT THERE IS A CASE FOR A PRIVATE SUIT TO REMEDY THE SITUATION.
UM, IT'S JUST, THAT'S, THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT PART OF OUR PURVIEW AS LEGAL HAS STATED.
BUT THIS IS A PRETTY GROSS VIOLATION OF, OF, YOU KNOW, JUST, IT'S HARD TO IMAGINE REALTORS WERE INVOLVED IN THIS TRANSACTION TO BE, TO BE QUITE HONEST WITH YOU.
AND I, I'M STRUGGLING WITH IT.
SO THEN FOLLOWING YOUR QUESTION, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF ON THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
WHEN YOU SAY, UH, ISSUANCE OR COR TO REFRAME JUST THE ROOF AND OR, AND TO THE ORIGINAL FORM AND REBUILD THE FRONT ELEVATION TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL, DOES THAT INCLUDE THE CARPORT AS WELL? THERE'S, THERE'S NO CARPORT.
THERE'S A, YOUR GARAGE, A SINGLE CAR GARAGE THERE.
OR, UH, I BELIEVE THERE'S A PHOTO FROM 1950.
THIS SHOWS, SHOWS IT HAVING A CARPORT.
SO I'M ASSUMING WHEN IT WAS PUT INTO INVENTORY, IT LOOKED LIKE THE MIDDLE PICTURE ON PAGE FOUR, CORRECT? YEAH, THE CARPORT, UM, WAS IN THE ORIGINAL HOME, UM, IN THE BLA PHOTO.
BUT IN RECENT YEARS, UM, PRIOR TO HOW IT LOOKS NOW THAT CARPORT WAS NOT THERE.
COULD WE CLARIFY THAT TAYLOR? IN THE RECOMMENDATION? YEAH.
THAT IT BE RESTORED TO THE POINT AT WHICH IT WAS DESIGNATED CONTRIBUTING MM-HMM
TO ALLOW THE HOMEOWNER TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO KEEP THE SPACE, INTERIOR SPACE THAT WAS PURCHASED WITH THE COMMISSION.
SO YOU ARE SAYING KEEP THE AGREE WITH THAT, KEEP THE GARAGE.
TO KEEP IT AT THE POINT AT WHICH IT WAS INVENTORIED, THE POINT AT WHICH IT WAS DESIGNATED CONTRIBUTING FOR THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE GARAGE, NOT THE CARPORT, BUT THE INVENTORY IS THE INVENTORY.
THE FIRST PICTURE IS JUST THE, THE INITIAL TAX PHOTOGRAPH.
I MEAN, I, I, THIS IS TOUGH 'CAUSE I, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS PUNITIVE, UM, TO A DEGREE.
BUT AS THE CHAIR SAID, OUR OUR ROLE IS TO, TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE RESOURCE.
AND THE RESOURCE HAS BEEN EGREGIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, UH, ALTERED.
UM, AND, AND I HOPE THERE IS SOME LEGAL ACTION FOR YOU BECAUSE THIS WAS, THIS IS WRONG.
UM, I HAVE, I MEAN, I DID DO MY DUE DILIGENCE WITH THIS HOME.
I MEAN, AFTER I PURCHASED IT, OF COURSE I'VE GONE THROUGH VARIOUS, UH, ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
[00:35:01]
I'VE CONTACT BECAUSE I THINK THAT, UM, THE SELLER OF THAT HOUSE WAS A REPUTABLE COMPANY AND I'M NOT VERY FAMILIAR WITH THEM, BUT IT'S HOR I THINK IT'S HORTON OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.I'VE CONTACTED VARIOUS REAL ESTATE ATTORNEYS TO SEE IF MAYBE THEY CAN BUY BACK THE HOME THAT WAS SO DEFECTIVE OR THAT HAS ALL THESE TIGHT ISSUES TO IT.
BUT I HAVEN'T FOUND AN ATTORNEY THAT WOULD WANNA TAKE ON SUCH A CASE.
DO YOU, THIS IS SEEMS LIKE AN INTRUSION, BUT DO YOU HAVE A MORTGAGE ON THIS? NO, I, NO, I DO NOT.
SO WAS THERE A TITLE RUN ON THE PROPERTY? I, YES, I BELIEVE SO.
I MEAN, I USED A, A REAL, I MEAN, I, THAT'S NOT MY JOB.
I HIRED A, A REALTOR YEAH, A REALTY COMPANY TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE THINGS.
AND IT ALL TURNED OUT FAVORABLE, READY FOR PURCHASE.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND IN MY, JUST IN MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE WHEN I'VE PURCHASED A HOME MM-HMM
THE TITLE COMPANY RESEARCHES THE TITLE AND IS SUPPOSED TO TELL YOU IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES OR LIENS OR, OR THERE ARE NO LI THERE ARE NO LIENS ON THIS COMPANY.
WELL THEN YOU MAY HAVE A CASE AGAINST YOUR TITLE COMPANY.
RED, IT'S NOT, IT TO THE RED TAG WOULD NOT SHOW UP, WOULDN'T SHOW UP IN THE TITLE SEARCH, WOULD'VE SHOWN UP OR SHOULD HAVE SHOWN UP, WOULD'VE BEEN ON THE REAL ESTATE DISCLOSURE FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER.
WHICH ONE OF YOU CERTIFY THAT WAS EVERYTHING'S DIS HAS BEEN DISCLOSURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CODE OR THERE ARE THESE OUTSTANDING ISSUES.
THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.
WAS THERE A SELLER'S DISCLOSURE FORM PROVIDED TO YOU? I'M SORRY SIR, CAN YOU, DID YOU GET A SELLER'S DISCLOSURE FORM FROM THE SELLER? A SELLER'S DISCLOSURE? I DON'T, I DON'T RECALL.
WELL, I WOULD RECOMMEND CONTACTING THE BROKERS OF THE REAL ESTATE COMPANIES THAT WERE INVOLVED IN IT.
AND YOU CAN CALL, UM, THE TEXAS REAL ESTATE COMMISSION.
COULD I ANSWER REAL QUICKLY? OH, PLEASE.
UM, COMMISSIONER Y'S QUESTION ABOUT RECLASSIFICATION.
IT, THE BUILDING COULD BE RECLASSIFIED AND IT WOULD GO THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS AS THIS LAST ONE WE HAD HERE, WHAT IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS THAT JUST GOT APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL FOR THE GARAGE RECLASSIFICATION FROM CON FROM POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING TO NON-CONTRIBUTING.
SO WE WOULD BRING IT BACK HERE TO, YOU OFFER CONSIDERATION TO RECLASSIFY WITH A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TO CHANGE THAT CLASSIFICATION.
BUT IT NEEDS TO FOLLOW THAT PROCESS.
I, I DON'T FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT BECAUSE IT'S TANTAMOUNT TO REWARDING THE PREVIOUS CONTRACTOR FOR DOING THE BAD WORK.
'CAUSE SOMEONE COULD JUST SCREW A HOUSE UP REALLY BADLY AND THEN THEY GET THE HOUSE DECLASSIFIED AND THEY GET AWAY WITH IT.
TO ME, IT SEEMS LIKE A DANGEROUS, UH, PRECEDENT TO BE SETTING COMMISSIONER LAUS.
I AM TOTALLY A HUNDRED PERCENT WITH YOU.
NORMALLY I'M THE MOST CONSERVATIVE ONE HERE, BUT THEN AGAIN, THIS HOUSE IS TOTALLY LIKE DR.
JACKAL AND MR. HYDE RIGHT NOW.
WHAT DO YOU, WHAT DO YOU INTEND TO RESTORE? SO I HAVE A ACTUALLY A PROACTIVE QUESTION FOR, UH, COMMISSIONER JACKSON AND YOURSELF.
WHAT WOULD YOU WANT TO RECEIVE RESTORED ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? THAT I COULD ACTUALLY SECOND THE MOTION.
SO YOU MENTIONED EARLIER ABOUT BRINGING THE HOUSE BACK TO THE MIDDLE PICTURE, AT LEAST LOOKS LIKE THE MIDDLE PICTURE UP THERE.
THAT MAYBE I WILL SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE THEN THE MIDDLE PICTURE IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE WHEN IT WAS INVENTORY, WHICH THE POINT THAT IT ENTERED THE SYSTEM.
I COULD BE, BECAUSE WE DON'T REQUIRE PEOPLE TO RESTORE SOMETHING BACK TO HOW IT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY, JUST TO HOW IT WAS IN THE INVENTORY.
AND, AND THAT'S FOR THE RECORD, THAT'S HOW IT'S DESCRIBED AS INVENTORY PHOTO ON PAGE FOUR.
I MEAN, WHEN, WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE A LOSS OF MATERIALS, IN THE CASE OF SIDING, WE REQUIRE REPLACEMENT OF LIKE MATERIAL SHAPE, SIZE.
UM, SO I SEE THIS AS A SIMILAR CASE WHERE WE'RE REQUIRING THE MATERIAL HAS BEEN LOST.
WE ARE REQUIRING, YOU KNOW, AT A POINT IN TIME THE DESIGN THE MATERIALS, UM, IN KIND THE, THE, OKAY, THE RECREATION OF WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY HERE.
BUT I, I'M WONDERING WAS THIS SOMETHING WE COULD MAYBE DEFER TO GIVE THE OWNER SOME TIME TO TALK TO THE TEXAS REAL ESTATE BOARD AND GET SOME MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT LEGAL OPTIONS SHE HAS BEFORE WE WE DECIDE SOMETHING? SINCE IT SOUNDS LIKE SHE HASN'T DONE THAT RESEARCH YET.
I'M JUST NOT SURE THAT THAT'S OUR JOB.
I THINK OUR JOB IS ABOUT THE RESOURCE AND WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO ABOUT THE RESOURCE AND HER UNFORTUNATE PREDICAMENT.
YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO, WELL, I MEAN, IF PRIVATELY WE, IF WE MAKE A, A DECISION AND THEN IT, IT DOESN'T GET EXECUTED, THEN IT'S LIKE WE HAVEN'T MADE THE DECISION.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A WAY WE CAN FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S
[00:40:01]
MONEY THAT WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS.IF WE WANT TO HAVE IT BE PUT BACK THE WAY IT WAS.
BECAUSE IT'S FRUSTRATING WHEN YOU SAY TO DO SOMETHING AND THEN NOTHING HAPPENS.
WELL, I THINK THE RECOMMENDATION IS THE, THE ROOF AND THE FRONT, THE FRONT OF THE HOME, THE WINDOW, THE LIGHT PATTERN, THE WINDOW OPENINGS.
UM, THIS, THIS IS NOT ADDRESSING THE REAR OR THE SIDES OR, UM, WE, AND WE STILL HAVE TO PARSE THROUGH THE GARAGE.
IF THE GARAGE, UM, THE GARAGE PER THIS C THIS THIS, UM, C OF R THAT THAT WOULD REMAIN A, A ENCLOSED SPACE.
WE STILL NEED TO, UH, MAKE TO WRESTLE WITH WHAT IS THE, HOW IS THE OUTSIDE? I MEAN, RIGHT NOW THE WAY THE C OF R READS IS THAT THE EXTERIOR OF THAT GARAGE WOULD LOOK LIKE IT DID WHEN IT BECAME PART OF THE INVENTORY PER THE C OF R.
THAT'S HOW I UNDERSTAND IT FROM STEP.
SO, UM, AND AGAIN, THIS THING HAS NOT COME BEFORE US UNTIL NOW, BUT THIS HAS BEEN OUT THERE FOR A LONG TIME WITH THESE RED TAGS.
AND I'VE GOT ONE MORE THING TO THROW INTO THE MIX.
SO ON THE FRONT LEFT, THERE ARE TWO SORT OF NARROW HIGH WINDOWS, WHICH IS A BEDROOM RIGHT NOW.
AND SO WE WOULD BE REMOVING EGRESS WINDOWS, PUTTING BACK THIS ORIGINAL SIZE WINDOW, THEREBY MAKING THE FRONT BEDROOM.
WE CAN'T SEE THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROOM.
SO IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE AN EGRESS ISSUE.
THERE'S TWO WINDOWS ON THIS SIDE.
SO THEN, SO THEN, SO THEN ANY C OF R WOULD HAVE TO INCLUDE PUTTING IN EGRESS WINDOWS ON THE SIDE.
'CAUSE THE FRONT WINDOW NO LONGER MEET EGRESS.
BUT, BUT WE'RE NOT CODE ENFORCEMENT PEOPLE.
I, I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE TO SORT THAT OUT WITH THE RIGHT PLAN REVIEW.
LIKE I'M JUST SAYING THERE'S A, BECAUSE THE GARAGE, I MEAN THERE'S FIRE LIABILITY IF YOU'RE GONNA MAKE SOMEONE TAKE OUT EGRESS WINDOWS AND PUT IN FIXED WINDOWS.
THE OTHER POINT I GUESS MR. COUCH IS THAT WINDOW THAT'S BEEN TAKEN OUT IS CLEARLY VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY AT THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
IT'S NOT OBSCURED BY ANYTHING IN THE, ON THE PICTURE.
MAYBE WE COULD PUT, WE COULD PUT THAT PICTURE UP ON THE SCREEN FOR A MOMENT.
THAT RIGHT THERE, YOU CALL OUT THE PAGE NUMBER, YOU'RE ON COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.
WHICH ONE WHAT I MEAN WE ALSO HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM IN THE GARAGE.
'CAUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S A BEDROOM TOO.
AND I HAVE RIGHT GARAGE, WE, WE, WE PUT THE FAKE GARAGE DOOR THERE, THERE WON'T BE ANY WINDOWS IN THERE.
SO THERE, THERE'S ALL SORTS OF ISSUES HERE THAT GO BEYOND JUST THE FRONT FACADE OF THE HOUSE.
IF WE TELL 'EM TO CHANGE IT BACK.
MY, MY MY POINT IS THAT WHY ARE WE DOING THAT? WHICH IS ACTUALLY CODE ENFORCEMENT? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, EVEN THOUGH WE SAY WE WANT WHAT WE WANT, WHICH IS JUST A FRONT FACADE, THEY STILL HAVE TO GO AND GET NOT JUST A COA BUT ACTUALLY A BUILDING PERMIT.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CODE ENFORCEMENT ON THIS COMMISSION PAST BUILDING PERMIT.
I UNDERSTAND, BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE DISCUSSING CODE ENFORCEMENT HERE.
ACTUALLY, WE, WE WE'RE DISCUSSING DIFFERENT ISSUES.
BUT WE'RE DISCUSSING WHAT WE CAN SEE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, ESPECIALLY ON THE FRONT OF THE HOME.
AND SO, UM, JUST, JUST, JUST AS, UM, SOMEONE HAS TO ASK A QUESTION BECAUSE I'VE CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING.
I CAN, IS THERE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? LET'S REPHRASE.
LIKE THE WHOLE, UM, I DON'T THINK IT, ARE YOU LIVING IN THE HOME CURRENTLY? UH, NO MA'AM.
WHAT I, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.
PERHAPS, UH, WHAT PAGE IS ON THE SCREEN? COULD STOP.
AND THE TOP, WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE TO SEE IT.
IT'S A PHOTO OF THE HOUSE AND BENEATH IT IS A DRAWING OF THE HOUSE.
DO YOU KNOW WHERE THAT DRAWING CAME FROM? I WHAT, WHAT WAS THE SOURCE OF THAT DRAWING? DRAWING FROM THE, OF THE HOUSE IN, IN WHATEVER FORM IT'S OH YEAH, HE WANTS TO KNOW WHERE THIS PICTURE CAME FROM.
UM, THESE ARE, THOSE ARE THE PROPOSED, UH, FOR, TO SUBMIT TO THE PERMITTING CENTER.
SO I HAVE THE DRAWINGS TO SUBMIT ALONG WITH THE, WELL, I WAS LOOKING FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF, UH, EITHER APPROPRIATENESS OR NOW THE REMEDIATION BECAUSE THEY WON'T MOVE FORWARD IF I DON'T HAVE THAT DOCUMENT.
UM, I CAN APPLY FOR IT, BUT THEY'RE GONNA STOP BECAUSE THEY WANNA SEE THAT STRUCTURAL DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING.
THEY DO NEED TO SEE THAT DOCUMENT, OF COURSE, TO MOVE FORWARD TO GET THE PERMITS.
WHY ARE WE NOT CONSIDERING THIS A LEGAL DEMOLITION? GOOD POINT.
[00:45:01]
I MEAN, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT IS.EVERY, THERE'S NOTHING ORIGINAL LEFT.
AND THEN WE SHOULD ENACT THAT SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE.
BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE'RE NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ORDINANCE.
IF IT'S CONSIDERED LEGAL DEMOLITION, CAN WE PURSUE DAMAGES WITH THE INDIVIDUAL WHO PERFORMED THE DEMOLITION? THERE'S A PROVISION IN STATE LAW THAT ALLOWS CITIES TO MUNICIPALLY ENFORCE AGAINST SOMEONE WHO HAS DEMOLISHED A HISTORIC LANDMARK OR SOMETHING THAT IS PROTECTED WITHIN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.
IT'S NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS COMMISSION, IT'S A DETERMINATION BY, IN THIS CASE, REALLY THE ADMINISTRATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD WANNA UNDERTAKE SUCH A CASE, WHETHER OR NOT THAT'S, IT'S NOT COUNSEL, IT'S ADMINIS ADMINISTRATION.
AND THAT MAY I COMMENT ON IT WAS ALSO FOR COMMISSIONER, UH, COSGROVE'S QUESTION TO STAFF.
TO, YOU'LL HAVE THE SAME QUESTION COME UP, UH, FOR THE ITEM ON EAST 11TH STREET TODAY, WHICH A COUPLE ITEMS DOWN.
AND THE, THE QUESTION, UH, SOMETHING THAT'S LEGALLY, UM, DEMOLISHED PER THE BUILDING CODE FOR THE BUILDING INSPECTORS IS DIFFERENT THAN SOMETHING THAT'S LEGALLY DEMOLISHED PER THE PRESERVATION CODE.
UM, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE WE ARE THERE.
SO IT'S IT, AND, AND THAT'S GONNA COME UP ON THAT OTHER ITEM WHERE WE'RE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
IT'S BECAUSE IT, IT, IT'S NOT A, YOU KNOW, THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR PRESERVATION ORDINANCE IS SET UP FOR IN A WAY.
I HAVE A QUESTION FOR COUNSEL.
UM, SO ASSUMING, WELL, LET'S SAY THAT IT'S LOOKING LIKE THIS IS AN ILLEGAL DEMOLITION, NOT BY THE PARTY STANDING IN FRONT OF US.
WHAT NEXT? IF THERE WERE A STRUCTURE THAT WAS NOT, THAT WAS NOT LEGAL AND DEMOLISHED, EVEN IF IT WASN'T HISTORICAL, BECAUSE IT COULD BE EITHER.
WHAT NEXT, IF ANOTHER PARTY WERE TO PURCHASE IT, WHETHER THEY KNEW IT OR NOT, WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? LET ME READ YOU THE DEFINITION OF WHAT DEMOLITION MEANS IN THE CONTEXT OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE.
IT MEANS AN ACTOR PROCESS THAT DESTROYS IN WHOLE OR IN PART OR PERMANENTLY IMPAIRS THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF ANY BUILDING STRUCTURE, OBJECT OR SITE.
THE TERM ALSO INCLUDES DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, WHICH IS A DIFFERENT FUNCTION THAT WE USUALLY USE FOR OLDER STRUCTURES WHERE THEY'RE JUST NOT MAINTAINED.
UM, SO I THINK IF YOU ALL WANT TO OPERATE UNDER THAT, THAT'S A DIFFERENT AVENUE.
I WOULD THINK THAT THEN THAT WOULD CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP WITH A RE-DESIGNATION OF THIS STRUCTURE.
I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT ARE YOU ASKING FOR, LOOKING FOR EXPECTING FROM FOLLOWING THE PROCEDURE IN DEMOLITION AND SAYING SHAME? IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S BEEN DEMOLISHED.
I MEAN, IT'S STANDING, IT'S STRUCTURALLY, WE ASSUME STRUCTURALLY SAFER COULD BE MADE.
SO I WAS JUST POINTING OUT THAT IT SEEMS TO ME, TO ME, FALL MORE IN THAT CATEGORY OF THE ORDINANCE.
I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THE END RESULT IS, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I PROBABLY WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION TO TRY TO RESTORE WHAT WE CAN OF THE HOUSE AND, AND MOVE FORWARD.
AND, YOU KNOW, AS FAR AS EGRESS AND BEDROOMS, I, I DON'T, THEY'LL HAVE TO FIGURE THAT OUT GOING FORWARD.
AND I GUESS THEIR RECOURSE, I MEAN THEY HAVE WOULD NEED TO TAKE LEGAL ACTION AGAINST THE SELLER, THE REALTORS, WHAT, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, TO, TO, TO RECUPERATE WHAT THE EXPENSES ARE.
BUT THAT, THAT WOULD BE MY TAKE ON IT.
UM, MR. CHAIR, I, I AM ACTUALLY IN FAVOR OF, I THINK SOMEBODY MENTIONED ABOUT DEFERRING THIS TO ACTUALLY ALLOW THE HOMEOWNER AND NOW KNOWING THAT, UH, AND UH, HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH PRESERVATION OFFICE, KNOWING ALL OUR CONCERNS AND ACTUALLY COME BACK WITH A GAME PLAN, WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT IS VERY, UH, TO ME VERY TARGETED.
WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT TO RESTORE FOR THIS HOUSE? LIKE THE FRONT FACADE, THE WINDOW SHOULD LOOK LIKE THIS.
THE GARAGE NOW IS A, IS A LIVING SPACE, BUT DO WE WANT TO HAVE WINDOWS ALLOWED OR HAVE IT AS A GARAGE DOOR, A FAKE GARAGE DOOR, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THEN IT'S EASIER RIGHT NOW IT'S TOO MANY THINGS BE JUGGLING RIGHT NOW.
I THINK WE'VE BEEN CLEAR ON THAT.
TAKE IT BACK TO THE POINT OF INVENTORY.
[00:50:02]
I MEAN, I THINK STAFF, WE, WE TRUST, WE TRUST STAFF TO, TO UH, ENFORCE OUR RULING.IF THAT IS IN FACT OUR DECISION.
BUT TAKE IT BACK IF IT'S AN OPERATIONAL OR FIXED GARAGE DOOR, THOSE ARE THE SEMANTICS OF IT.
I MEAN, IF, IF THE COMMISSION VOTES TO TAKE IT BACK TO A POINT IN TIME, UH, THAT IT IS WELL DOCUMENTED.
I THINK THE ONLY THING I WOULD SUGGEST BASED ON THE, WHAT THE DISCOURSE I'VE HEARD, IF THINGS GO, THE WAY I'VE HEARD IT IS THAT IN ADDITION TO THE FRONT ELEVATION, IT WOULD BE THE FRONT SIDE ELEVATIONS, UM, WHICH ARE VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY WOULD BE PART OF THAT CONSIDERATION.
AND THEREFORE WE KNOW WHAT IT IS BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHS OF IT.
AND THE GARAGE WOULD BE A GARAGE DOOR AS IT WAS.
AND, AND SO IT WOULD BE CLEARLY ALL, ALL THAT IS VERY CLEAR, I BELIEVE.
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOT CLEAR.
I WOULD LIKE THAT I WOULD LIKE THE FRONT, NOT JUST THE FRONT.
I WOULD LIKE THE SIDE TOO THAT IS VISIBLE.
I'M VERY CONSERVATIVE ABOUT THAT.
BUT I WANT TO ALLOW THE HOMEOWNER A CHANCE TO DIGEST ALL THIS.
THAT'S A LOT TO DIGEST CONSIDERING THE HOUSE IS A TOTALLY BRAND NEW HOUSE COMPARED TO WHAT WE WANT IT TO LOOK LIKE NOW.
WE ARE DESIGNERS IN SOME WAYS AND, AND UH, TO ALLOW THE, THE OWNER TO DECOMPRESS THAT WITH THE PRESERVATION OFFICE, UH, MAY GIVE THEM MORE TIME TO THINK ABOUT THIS WHOLE THING.
BECAUSE IT IS RIGHT NOW I FEEL LIKE I'M RAMMING IT DOWN THE APPLICANT'S THROAT WELL, BUT WE'RE NOT REALLY DESIGNING ANYTHING.
YEAH, I DISAGREE 'CAUSE WE'RE, THIS IS C OF R PROCESS.
SO A C UNDER C OF R IT'S DIFFERENT THAN A C OF A.
THE RULES ARE DIFFERENT IN A C OF R AND C OF R IS A PROCESS OF PUTTING SOMETHING BACK TO THE BEST.
IT CAN BE USING NEW MATERIALS BUT TO MATCH THE, THE PROPORTIONS, THE OPENINGS, FENESTRATION, THE, THE, THE APPEARANCE OF THE MATERIALS AND SO ON.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A VERY EGREGIOUS, UH, THE MOST EGREGIOUS ONE I'VE EVER SEEN ON MY, ON THIS COMMISSION.
AND SO I WOULD HATE TO SEE, I I I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS IT BECAUSE WELL COULD, UM, BUT COULD WE MAKE A PROPOSAL THAT WE DEFER IT AND THEN THEY COME BACK WITH, UH, WHOEVER MADE THAT DRAWING ON THE WHATEVER PAGE IT WAS SHOWING HOW THEY WOULD PROPOSE TO REDESIGN IT TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT DID IN THE INVENTORY PHOTO AND THEN WE COULD APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THAT SO THAT WE ACTUALLY SEE SOMETHING RATHER THAN JUST GIVING THEM THIS MARCHING ORDER.
'CAUSE THAT'S A LOT OF DECISIONS TO MAKE 'CAUSE THERE'S ALL SORTS OF STUFF GOING ON THAT'S DIFFERENT.
AND THERE MAY BE SOME THINGS AS THEY DRAW IT THAT THEY REALIZE ARE REALLY DIFFICULT.
LIKE THE WAY THE ROOF IS FRAMED, I THINK THEY HAVE TO REFRAME THE ENTIRE ROOF CORRECT.
TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE THE OLD WAY.
SO MAYBE IF THEY MADE A DRAWING AND BROUGHT IT BACK TO US TO SHOW US IN CONSULTATION WITH STAFF WHAT THEY WOULD PROPOSE TO DO, THEN WE COULD REVIEW SOMETHING.
'CAUSE I FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE TELLING THEM TO MAKE THAT MANY CHANGES WITHOUT HAVING ANYTHING TO LOOK AT.
UM, IF I CAN BRIEFLY INTERRUPT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS ACTUALLY WILLING TO STICK WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION.
UM, THEY ARE ASKING IF THEY CAN GET, IF THEY CAN MAKE A FAKE GARAGE DOOR, UM, TO GIVE THE ILLUSION OF A GARAGE, BUT THEY'RE OKAY WITH OUR RECOMMENDATION.
THERE IS A LOT MORE THAN JUST A FAKE GARAGE DOOR THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO THE FRONT OF THAT HOUSE.
SO I, I THINK LIKE, LIKE COMMISSIONER BRUCHE WAS SAYING, THERE IS A MUCH LARGER GROUP OF DECISIONS THAT NEED TO BE MADE THAT WE NEED TO, I THINK SEE.
SO WE CAN DECIDE IF WE THINK THAT IT LOOKS LIKE THE INVENTORY PHOTO OR NOT.
AND COMMISSIONER COUCH TO BE, I MEAN, BASED ON WHAT I HEARD AS WELL, THEY'RE GONNA NEED TO DO A DRAWING FOR THE CITY JUST FOR THE PERMITTING SHOWING THAT THAT VERSION THAT YOU'RE DESCRIBING.
AND SO, UM, SO IS THAT A MOTION TO DEFER? I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT A MOTION.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? NOT HEARING ANY.
ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION? AYE UH, AYE.
CAN I, CAN I ASK A POINT OF CLARIFICATION HERE? YOUR DEFERRAL, WE JUST, WE'RE JUST DEFERRING, IT'S JUST A DEFERRAL.
BUT WE DON'T TELL THEM THAT THEY NEED TO COME BACK WITH DRAWINGS.
THEY CAN DO THAT, THAT WE'D HOPE THEY DO THAT.
BUT IF, IF THEY DON'T, THEN THAT WE DEFER AGAIN.
SO HOW MANY ARE I, CAN YOU RAISE YOUR HAND? JUST OKAY.
AND I'M NOT SURE I ANSWERED THE DIRECTOR'S QUESTION IN ADDITION TO THE QUESTIONS GOING ON ABOUT DEMOLITION AND SO FORTH, BUT IT
[00:55:01]
IS POSSIBLE UNDER THE ENFORCEMENT SECTION OF THE CODE, I THINK TO POTENTIALLY, THIS IS NEW FOR ME TOO, AS YOU SAY, THIS IS KIND OF A MAJOR ISSUE HERE.UM, SO I DON'T KNOW IF THESE HAVE BEEN HANDLED THIS WAY IN THE PAST, BUT THERE IS A PROVISION THAT THIS, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE COULD REFER THIS UPWARDS TO THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO THE LEGAL OFFICE FOR POSSIBLE PROSECUTION AND ENFORCE RECONSTRUCTION THAT WAY.
SO, UM, I WILL LOOK INTO THAT BEFORE YOUR NEXT MEETING AS WELL WHEN THIS COMES BACK.
THAT'D BE APPRECIATED BECAUSE, UM, YEAH, NOT SURE WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
I MEAN THIS IS, THIS IS THE FIRST ONE PROBABLY SINCE THIS ORDINANCE HAS BEEN ADOPTED BY COUNCIL.
I'M GONNA GUESS LAST ONE, RIGHT? AND I WOULD JUST SAY FOR THE RECORD AS I, IF I MAY, AS CHAIR WHEN TALKING WITH THE ADMINISTRATION AND FOR OUR DIRECTOR, I MEAN THERE, THERE, THERE ARE 25 RED TAGS.
SO THIS WASN'T ON, ON SOMETHING THAT WASN'T KNOWN.
UM, OR, SO THIS IS, THERE'S THERE'S RED TAGS ON THE HIR PHOTOS, RIGHT? SHOW IN THE PICTURE.
SO, UM, I THINK THIS IS ALSO, THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE EVEN MORE EGREGIOUS.
EVEN POTENTIAL NOTIFICATION WAS VERY CLEAR.
SO WE ARE NOW GOING TO MOVE ON.
I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE ROMAN HAS RETURNED OR HAS, HAS ARRIVED.
CHANCE, WHAT WE WERE JUST DISCUSSING.
SO, UM, COMMISSIONERS, CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ONLINE, WE HAVE ITEM A ONE FOR THIS AGENDA.
ITEM A ONE IS 1120 EAST 14TH STREET.
THIS IS A HOUSE IN THE NORTH HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT, STRICT CIRCA 1926, UH, TO BUNGALOW.
AND THE APPLICATION IS TO ADD REQUEST FOR C OF A FOR DEMOLITION.
I'D LIKE TO GO FORWARD TO THE IMAGES BEFORE I GET TO OUR CRITERIA AND RECOMMENDATION.
IF WE COULD GO TO THE MAP, IT'S, OR RIGHT THERE, THE BUILDING IS ABOUT IN THE MIDDLE OF, UH, NOR HILL ON 14TH.
THE PICTURE AFTER THIS IS A PICTURE FROM THE INVENTORY DATED 2012.
AND I'M JUST GONNA STEP THROUGH THE PICTURES.
THE PICTURE ON THE NEXT PAGE IS, UH, VERY RECENT OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE IT HAS THE, THE, UH, SIGN IN FRONT FOR DEMOLITION.
AND THEN THE NEXT PAGE HAS SOME PICTURES THAT I TOOK WHEN I VISITED THE SITE WITH THE, THE GENTLEMAN THAT OWNS IT.
AND, UM, YOU SEE HERE, THERE IS A LITTLE DAMAGE AROUND THE FOUNDATION.
THIS IS ONE OF THOSE HOMES THAT SITS, UH, ON A PERIMETER BEAM, PRIMARILY WITH A, UH, SILL PLATE.
AND THEN IT GOES UP FROM THERE.
AND THERE IS A PRETTY GOOD AMOUNT OF DAMAGE AROUND THE SILL PLATE, UH, IN THIS SPOT HERE.
AND ON THE EAST SIDE WHERE THE CHIMNEY IS.
ON THE NEXT PAGE IS THE RIGHT FRONT PORCH AREA.
AND THE NEXT PAGE IS SORT OF SHOOTING DOWN DIAGONALLY ON THE WEST ELEVATION AND THE NORTH ELEVATION FROM THE FRONT CORNER.
AND THEN ON THE NEXT PAGE IS A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THAT WALL.
SO WE HAVE WHAT APPEARS TO BE ORIGINAL SIDING, UH, WITH THE, THE RAIL AND THEN THE LAP BOARD BENEATH IT.
THAT WOULD APPEAR TO BE ORIGINAL WOODEN WINDOWS IN VARIOUS STATES OF, OF REPAIR.
THE NEXT PHOTOGRAPH WITH THE CHIMNEY IS, UM, DOWN THAT EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING.
AND THEN THE, THE PHOTO ON PAGE 15 IS THE REAR ELEVATION WHERE THERE'S, YOU KNOW, DAMAGE TO THE SIDING DOWN LOW.
AND YOU SEE THAT BRICK PERIMETER BEAM WITH A TWO BY FOUR SILL PLATE.
AND I CAN ONLY PRESUME THAT WOULD BE BALLOON FRAMING RUNNING UP FROM THERE.
THE NEXT PAGE IS A SANDBORNE MAP, WHICH IS SORT OF KEY HERE.
YOU KNOW, UM, THIS, UH, APPLICANT HAD ALSO ASKED FOR, TALKED ABOUT RECLASSIFYING THE PROPERTY, BUT I JUST WANNA POINT OUT HERE THAT THIS BUILDING IN THE RED IMAGE IS THE BUILDING IN THE SANDBORN.
IT IS IN THE SAME FORM THAT IT WAS IN ORIGINALLY.
AND THEN THE GRAY AREA BENEATH IS FROM OUR INVENTORY WHERE THE BUILDING, WHERE THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED, LABELING IT A 1926 BUNGALOW, UH, POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING OF COURSE, POTENTIALLY CONTRIBUTING WAS LATER, LATER MODIFIED TO CONTRIBUTING.
HE DOES HAVE A SUPPORT LETTER ON PAGE 17 FOR, UH, FOR DEMOLITION.
I'LL LEAVE, LEAVE YOU THAT TO READ FROM, FROM UH, UH, SOMEONE WHO DOES LIVE NEARBY, VERY CLOSE I THINK.
AND, UM, IN YOUR, ON YOUR IPAD AND IN THE PACKET ARE ATTACHMENTS, A THROUGH IIJ
[01:00:01]
IN THERE.AND SO LET'S GO BACK NOW TO HOW WE, WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING.
WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A CERTIFICATE, APPROPRIATENESS FOR DEMOLITION AS PER SECTION 33 2 47 A ONE.
THE, THIS COMMISSION SHOULD ISSUE ONE OF THESE.
IF A BUILDING HAS SERIOUSLY DETERIORATED TO AN UNSTABLE STATE AND IS BEYOND REASONABLE REPAIR, WE'VE DETERMINED THAT THE STRUCTURE HAS DETERIORATED IN SOME PLACES, BUT ITS OVERALL CONDITION IS NOT CONSIDERED BEYOND REASONABLE REPAIR AND THE BUILDING DOES NOT MEET THIS CRITERIA.
NUMBER TWO, IF THE APPLICANT PRESENTS CREDIBLE EVIDENCE, UH, THAT THIS WOULD BE AN UNRE UNREASONABLE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
UH, AND SO THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED FINANCIAL INFORMATION WITH THE APPLICATION MATERIALS THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE TODAY AND MAY SPEAK TO THOSE IN HIS EFFORT TO OBTAIN AN ISSUANCE OF A C OF A.
THAT INFORMATION, AGAIN, IS ATTACHED.
THE PHYSICAL STATE WE FEEL OF THIS BUILDING IS NOT CONSIDERED EXTRAORDINARY OR EXCEPTIONAL FOR A PROPERTY WHICH HAS EXPERIENCED SIGNIFICANT DEFERRED MAINTENANCE OR NEGLECT LOCATED IN THE CITY OF HOUSTON, IN A CITY OF HOUSTON HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE, UM, NEXT SECTION C UNDER 33, 2 47.
I, I, I WANNA STEP THROUGH THESE JUST JUST TO POINT THEM OUT THERE.
THERE'S A LOT THAT YOU SUBMIT WHEN YOU WANNA DEMOLISH A BUILDING.
THERE'S A SECTION THAT SAYS WHETHER THERE'S A ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
IT DEPENDS UPON WHETHER IT, THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN PROVEN TO BE INCAPABLE OF EARNING A REASONABLE RETURN REGARDLESS OF WHETHER RETURN IS THE MOST PROFITABLE RETURN, ET CETERA.
AND AGAIN, THE APPLICANT HAS SUPPLIED THAT DOCUMENTATION, BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO MEET THAT CRITERIA.
ON PAGE FOUR OF YOUR REPORT, THERE ARE OTHER ONES, LEMME GO THROUGH A FEW OF US.
TWO IS THE, THE OWNER HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PROPERTY CANNOT BE ADAPTED FOR ANY OTHER USE AND HE HASN'T PROVIDED, UM, CRITERIA THAT APPEARS TO SHOW THAT IT CANNOT BE ADAPTED.
UH, NOTHING WAS SUPPLIED REGARDING AN EFFORT TO FIND A PURCHASE PURCHASER OR LESSEE.
IT BASICALLY IS THE BUILDING NOT SUPPORTED AS HISTORICAL THAT GOES TO THAT SANDBORN.
THIS IS THE BUILDING IN THE INVENTORY.
AND UH, SO WE STAYED HERE, THE BUILDING AT THE SITE AS DESCRIBED IN THE INVENTORY, WHICH WAS ADOPTED DURING THE CREATION OF THE DISTRICT.
THE BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED DURING THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT PERIOD OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN NUMBER TWO HERE IS WHETHER THERE ARE DEFINITE PLANS FOR REUSE OF THE PROPERTY, IF THE PROPOSED DEMOLITION IS CARRIED OUT.
AND WHAT EFFECT SUCH PLANS HAVE ON THE ARCHITECTURAL, CULTURAL, HISTORICAL ARCHEOLOGICAL CHARACTER OF THE CONTEXT AREA.
THE APPLICANT HAS SUPPLIED DRAWINGS, ATTACHMENT G AND THE PROPOSED HOUSE THERE MINIMALLY WOULD NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR CONSTRUCTION IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT BASED ON ITS SCALE AND MASSING COMPARED TO THE SURROUNDING AND CONTEXT AREA.
AND THREE, THERE IS WHETHER REASONABLE MEASURES CAN BE TAKEN TO SAVE THE BUILDING.
AND AS STATED ABOVE, IT HAS SOME DETERIORATION, BUT IT IS COMMON PRACTICE.
IT IS COMMON PRACTICE TO RESTORE OR REHABILITATE HOUSES BACK FROM CONDITIONS SUCH AS THE CONDITION THAT THIS ONE IS IN.
AND, UH, SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING, UH, DEMOLITION, I MEAN, I'M SORRY, WE'RE RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF A C OF A FOR DEMOLITION.
AND I JUST WANNA SAY THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS BEEN, UM, VERY, EXTREMELY, UH, HELPFUL, COOPERATIVE.
HE'S, HE'S HAD ME OUT TO THE HOUSE.
UH, AND, UM, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
UM, I, I KNOW WE HAVE MAYBE TWO SPEAKERS.
I HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, BUT YOU MENTIONED THE APPLICANT'S HERE.
I MAY WANT TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING SO WE CAN GET THEIR INPUT AS WELL.
I THINK, I THINK COMMISSIONER COSGROVE HAS SOME, HAS DONE SOME RESEARCH IN THE PAST ON THE CANNOT THE HARDSHIP QUESTION.
SO, UM, LET ME OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND ROMAN, WE'LL COME BACK WITH MORE QUESTIONS.
I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGN UP, WHICH IS VIRGINIA KELSEY, BUT I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND IF THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST, I WOULD ALLOW THAT.
UM, BUT IF NOT, UM, VIRGINIA, IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
I AM THE VP OF DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR NOR HILL.
THE NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION HAS VOTED TO DENY THE DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 1120 EAST 14TH STREET.
WHILE WE ACKNOWLEDGE THERE HAS BEEN SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE CAUSED BY NEGLECT FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER, THE HOME COULD
[01:05:01]
BE REPAIRED.THE DAMAGE TO THE HOME WAS EVIDENT TO THE BUYER WHEN PURCHASING THE DAMAGE WAS NOT HIDDEN FROM SITE AND WAS REFLECTED IN THE SALES PURCHASE OF THE PRICE, THE SALES PRICE OF THE, OF THE HOUSE WHEN IT WAS PURCHASED.
IT IS IMPORTANT TO APPRECIATE THAT THE MAJORITY OF HOMES IN NOR HILL THAT HAVE HAD SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATIONS WERE TAKEN DOWN TO THE STUDS AND BROUGHT UP TO CURRENT STANDARDS.
THIS IS THE MOST COMMON PRACTICE IN NOR HILL AND THAT THE MARKETPLACE IN NOR HILL DOES SUPPORT SUCH INVESTMENTS IN PROPERTY.
THEY ARE THE NORM I ALSO WANNA SPEAK TO, AND HE HAS SUBMITTED A HOUSE, UH, THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO PUT HERE IN ITS STEAD.
AND IF SO, IF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WERE NOT A CONSIDERATION, THE PROPOSED DESIGN FOR A NEW HOUSE IS ALSO DENIED BY NOR HILL.
THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS NOT IN HARMONY WITH THE HISTORIC HOMES IN NOR HILL.
THE PROPOSED SIZE, SCALE, AND CHARACTER ARE NOT FOUND IN NOR HILL.
A 39 73 SQUARE FOOT, UH, HOUSE WITH 11 FOOT FIRST FLOOR AND 10 FOOT SECOND FLOOR DOES NOT EXIST IN NOR HILL.
RATHER THAN ELABORATE ON THE MANY DESIGN FEATURES WHICH ARE OUT OF CHARACTER TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WE RECOMMEND THE OWNER FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF WITH THE PROPOSED GUIDELINES TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO BE IN HARMONY WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
HOWEVER, MOTION AGAINST SPEAKER ONE MORE TIME.
IS THERE A SECOND? ALL IN FAVOR, AYE.
HOWEVER, SINCE THE GUIDELINES HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED, THE GUIDE FOR DEVELOPMENT MUST BE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION ORDINANCE, SECTION 33 DASH 2 42 NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHICH STATES THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION MUST NOT BE TALLER THAN THE TYPICAL HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING TRIBUTE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES IN THE CONTEXT AREA.
IN THE CONTEXT AREA, WHICH IS THE FACE OF THE BLOCK ON BOTH SIDES OF 14TH STREET, THERE IS ONE ORIGINAL TWO STORY GARAGE AND ONE CAMELBACK THAT WAS ADDED IN 2021.
THE CAMEL KNOT BACK NOT BEING ORIGINAL WOULD MEAN THAT THERE ARE NO TWO STORY HOMES AND THEREFORE A NEW TWO STORY HOME COULD NOT BE BUILT ON THIS LOT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS? ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, IF, IF, IF YOU'D LIKE, IF, IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK, PLEASE ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME AND YOU CAN ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, BUT THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN.
GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSION MEMBERS.
UH, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO CALL ME HARP.
UH, AS I WAS GOING THROUGH THE, UH, PROCESS WITH THE NOR HILL ASSOCIATION, UH, UH, THEY REACHED OUT TO ME SAYING THAT, HEY, YOUR APPLICATION'S COMING FORWARD.
UH, PLEASE SUBMIT APPLICA, WHATEVER THE APPLICATION IS.
UH, SO THEN I REALIZED THAT, UH, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S MISSING ON THE, UH, PACKET THAT THEY PRESENTED IS THE, UH, THE BASIS, UH, WHEN THEY SAY THERE'S LITTLE DAMAGE, UH, I DISAGREE BECAUSE, UH, AND I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT PACKET IS NOT ON THERE.
UH, IT'S ABOUT EIGHT PAGES OR 10 PAGES, AND IT JUST TALKS ABOUT THE PROPERTY CONDITION.
UM, SO I I I URGE YOU GUYS TO, UH, OR FOR ROMAN TO PUT THAT PACK THE BASIS, THE BASIS IS NOT IN THAT PACKET.
THE, THE PROPERTY CONDITION WOULD BE THIS.
WHAT PAGE DO YOU WANT US TO GO TO? IT'S IN THE PACKET.
I, I CHECKED, I DOUBLE CHECKED TOO.
WHAT PAGE? YOU, UH, WE GOT IT UP.
I SPLIT IT UP INTO THREE DIFFERENT, UH, UH, ARE THEY PHOTOGRAPHS, SIR? OR NO? WHAT ARE YOU CALLING THE BASIS? IS IT A LEGAL OR, OR PROFESSIONAL OPINION? SURE.
UH, NO, IT'S, UH, BY HUD'S CONSULTANT, UH, THAT HAS PUT TOGETHER A PACKET, UH, GOING OFF THE PROPERTY CONDITION OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE AND HOW TO GET IT THERE.
UH, SO THAT'S THE INSPECTION THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE NAME OF THE COMPANY? UH, IT'S THE HUD CONSULTANT.
DO THEY HAVE EXPERIENCE WITH HISTORIC PRESERVATION? YEAH.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THE HUD CONSULTANT, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE, THEY'RE TRAINED, UH, FROM, UH, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, UH, TO BE ABLE TO, UH, DECIDE IS THIS HOUSING DEVELOPED DEVELOPMENT, WHAT THE CONDITION SHOULD BE, EXCUSE ME.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT.
[01:10:02]
MARK? YES.IF THERE'S ANYTHING HERE YOU WANNA SHARE, WE HAVE A DOCUMENT MACHINE HERE, WE CAN, YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT NOW YOU WANT ME TO GO THROUGH SOME PART OF IT? WELL, IT'S, UM, IT'S PRETTY LENGTHY.
UH, SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, I FIGURED, I WAS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S SOME MISSING INFORMATION AND THAT'S WHY, UH, STAFF DENIED IT, UH, FOR WHATEVER REASON.
UH, BUT I APPRECIATE THE HOP FOR PUTTING IT ON THE AGENDA FOR THIS MONTH.
I, I PLEASE KIM? I THINK, SORRY, EXCUSE ME.
I JUST WANNA SAY, I THINK IT'S NOT POINT, THERE'S NO POINT IN GOING THROUGH A 10 PAGE, UH, REPORT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE AGENDA ON THE PACKET.
UH, IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN I SAY DEFER IT, UH, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS A, A CRITICAL DOCUMENT.
IF, IF YOU HAVE IT, IF YOU COULD JUST PUT THE COVER PAGE UP FOR US SO WE COULD UNDERSTAND WHO THE CONSULTANT IS.
I, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CONSULTANT HAS TO DO WITH ANYTHING.
I THINK IT'S A MORE SO OF HOW THE REPORT WAS WRITTEN.
WELL, IF THE CONSULTANT OR THE REPORT IS RECOMMENDING THAT THE HOUSE IS DETERIORATED TO A POINT THAT YOU FEEL IS SIGNIFICANT, THEN I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE SEE WHO THE CONSULTANT IS AND, AND WHAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS.
UH, THEIR NAME WAS ACTUALLY ON THE OTHER DOCUMENT DOCUMENTS AS WELL THAT YOU ALREADY HAVE ON YOUR IPAD.
WHAT CAN, CAN YOU TELL ME THE NAME? UH, THIS IS A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
I'M SORRY, FIRST YOU SAID A HUD CONSULTANT THERE.
OH, YEAH, THERE WAS A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER.
DID, DID YOU SEE THAT LETTER AS WELL? MM-HMM
SO MY QUESTION TO YOU OR, OR MAY I ASK THE QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT, PLEASE? YES.
UM, MY QUESTION TO YOU, UM, IS THE CONCERNING THE, THE CONDITION OF THE HOME WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT IN JUNE OF THIS YEAR, SO LESS THAN SIX MONTHS AGO, UM, IT, I, I FEEL CERTAIN HAS NOT DETERIORATED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE YOUR PURCHASE IN JUNE.
SO THERE WAS A GOOD, UM, IDEA OF THE CONDITION OF THE HOME WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT.
WAS YOUR INTENT ALWAYS TO DEMOLISH THE HOME AND PUT UP A NEW STRUCTURE? NO, UH, IT WAS NOT MY INTENT.
THERE WAS A, UH, THERE WAS TWO SURVEYS.
UH, THE SECOND SURVEY IS NOT, UH, IN THAT PACKET EITHER.
UH, BUT THE FIRST SURVEY WE WILL SHOW YOU, THERE WAS A DECK IN THE BACK, UH, WHEN I BOUGHT IT, THERE WAS A DECK, UH, WHEN WE TOOK THE DECK OUT, IT WAS, UH, WE SAW THE WHOLE PICTURE.
SO, UH, THAT WAS A DETERMINING FACTOR.
THE SECOND WAS, UH, THE NEIGHBOR'S, UH, UH, ROOF WATER, UH, WAS GUSHING OVER THE FENCE ONTO OUR PROPERTY AND COLLECTING, UH, UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE.
AND, UH, WE TOOK OUT ALMOST, UH, THREE FEET OF WATER.
WE SUBMERGED A, A PUMP IN THEIR WATER PUMP, AND WE TOOK ALL THAT WATER OUT.
SO JUST, UH, AN 80 YARDS OF TRASH, UH, WATER AND 80 YARDS OF TRASH IS NOT A GOOD COMBINATION.
BUT THAT, UH, THAT WAS NOT THE CONDITION OF THE HOME WHEN YOU PURCHASED IT IN JUNE? I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT.
UH, I THINK I BOUGHT IT, UH, RIGHT BEFORE THE, THE WEATHER CHANGED.
DID YOU HAVE AN INSPECTION WHEN YOU BOUGHT THE HOUSE? NO, I, I DID NOT.
I, I, I, BECAUSE I, UH, GENUINELY DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY.
HOW, HOW WAS, UH, ONE GONNA REMOVE THE DECK, UH, WITH ASKING THE SELLER PERMISSION? I DON'T, UH, IT IS JUST, UH, THAT A VERY WEIRD REQUEST.
THE, THE PHOTOS THAT I'M SEEING WHEN THE HOUSE WAS LISTED IN, UM, PRIOR TO YOUR PURCHASE, DON'T LOOK ANY DIFFERENT FROM THE PHOTOS THAT YOU'VE SUBMITTED.
I, I MEAN, MEANING THAT THE HOUSE LOOKED TO BE IN NEED OF, OF SIGNIFICANT BUT REPAIRABLE, UM, YOU KNOW, ATTENTION AT THE TIME YOU PURCHASED.
UH, WHAT'S THE QUESTION? I'M SORRY.
SO, SO DID, DID YOU BUY THE HOUSE FROM A REAL ESTATE AGENT? THAT'S CORRECT.
IF, IF IT'S LISTED ON THE MLS, UH, IT, IT IS REPRESENTED BY A REAL ESTATE AGENT.
THIS IS CLEAR FOR JOHN CAR COSGROVE.
IS IT REQUIRED THAT JUST, IS IT REQUIRED THAT YOU GET A INSPECTION WHEN YOU BUY A HOUSE? I THOUGHT IT WAS, IT'S NOT REQUIRED.
NO, IT'S, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE HIS CHOICE TO DO SO.
I MEAN, BUT AN INSPECTOR WOULD DEFINITELY HAVE GONE UNDER THE HOUSE.
I MEAN, THAT, THAT IS PART OF THE, BECAUSE I'M READING THE HAR LISTING AND IT SAYS THE HOUSE IN ROUGH CONDITION AND IT SAYS IT'S IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND YOU HAVE TO CHECK WITH THE CITY BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S THE REALTOR THAT WAS LISTING IT WAS AWARE THAT IT WAS IN ROUGH SHAPE, BUT, BUT YOU DIDN'T LOOK VERY CLOSELY
[01:15:01]
AT THE HOUSE WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT.UH, UH, JUST WANNA, UH, MAKE A STATEMENT.
UH, UH, I, I DID HAVE A, UH, A FRIEND OF MINE WHO HAS A RENOWNED INSPECTION COMPANY HERE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, UH, COME OUT AND, UH, GIVE AN OPINION.
AND, UH, THEY SAID IT'S DON'T EVEN GET AN INSPECTION.
UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T GET ONE.
UH, AND YES, I WENT OFF THE LISTING LIKE IT SAYS THAT THE HOUSE IS GOING TO NEED, UH, UH, A COMPLETE REPAIR JOB.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THIS SPEAKER? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UM, I'M GONNA ASK IF ANYONE ELSE, UH, WHILE THE PUBLIC HEARING IS STILL OPEN, IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE ROOM THAT'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ITEM? I'M NOT SEEING VERY FEW.
SO I'M GONNA ASSUME BACK TO PRESENTATION THERE IS NOT.
SO I'M GONNA CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME.
CAN I MAKE A RE RECOMMENDATION? YOU MAY.
UH, I, I MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
I HAVE A, BEFORE I ASK FOR THE SECOND, UH, CAN I ASK LEGAL ONE QUESTION? UH, THE ONLY, UH, ISSUE I SEE IS THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT THERE WAS INFORMATION SUBMITTED NOT IN OUR PACKET THAT THEY SUBMITTED.
UM, IN, IN LIGHT OF THAT, WOULD, IS, IS THERE, WOULD YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION TO DEFER THIS OR, UH, THAT'S UP TO YOU.
IF YOU ALL FEEL YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION TO MAKE A DETERMINATION, THAT'S YOUR DECISION.
UM, IF YOU WANT TO SEE THIS, I HEARD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ASKED ABOUT THIS OTHER REPORT AND SO ON.
ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, UM, WAS WHETHER OR NOT THIS HAD GONE THROUGH SUBSTANDARD BUILDING REVIEW OR ANY KIND OF INSPECTION THROUGH THAT SECTION, BUT THAT'S PROBABLY LESS CRITICAL FOR YOUR DECISION.
THAT'S MORE OF A, WAS THERE SOMETHING SUBMITTED THAT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PACKET? I BELIEVE SO.
I THINK THE PACKET, I HAVE THE ESTIMATE FOR WHAT, WHAT, UH, MR. WOOD HARP HAD TODAY.
AND THEN WE'RE SHARING WITH YOU PHOTOGRAPHS THAT APPEAR TO COME FROM THAT, THAT FROM THAT SIMILAR REPORT.
BUT THIS IS THE RENOVATION INSPECTION VERSUS THE, UH, THE DOCUMENT AND CULPA, THAT'S MY FAULT.
I DIDN'T, UH, IS THE DOCUMENT STARTING ON PAGE PAGE 62 THE SAME AS WHAT HE'S ASSERTING IS NOT IN OUR PACKET? IS, I'M SORRY.
WOULD YOU, THE DOCUMENT BEGINNING ON PAGE 62, IS THAT NOT, WHAT HE IS SAYING IS NOT IN A PARKING IN OUR PACKET IS IT'S AN ESTIMATE FOR RENOVATION AND IT HA SEEMS LIKE IT HAS THE SAME PHOTOGRAPH AS WHAT I SAW ON DOCUMENT CAMERA.
I'M, I'M JUST COMMISSIONER MCNEIL, I FOLLOW YOU, I FOLLOW, I FOLLOW YOUR QUESTION.
AND THERE'S ANOTHER DOCUMENT AT THAT, AT THE TOP LOOKS, IT'S VERY SIMILAR, BUT IT SAYS RENOVATION INSPECTION FOUR.
SO THIS PARTICULAR BDF THAT HE'S BROUGHT TODAY, I DO NOT HAVE IN YOUR PACKET.
I JUST MAKE THAT STATEMENT THERE.
SO, SO COMMISSIONER Y DO YOU THINK WE COULD DEFER THIS SO THAT THEY COULD BRING IT BACK WITH THAT MISSING DOCUMENT? JUST SO THAT WE DOT T DOT THE I'S AND CROSS THE T'S? I WOULD SAY IF THE APPLICANT HAS MADE REQUESTS THAT WE VIEW THIS DOCUMENT THAT WE SHOULD DEFER THIS TO ALLOW IT TO BE, I WAS GONNA ADD, I ALSO HEARD HIM SAY THAT.
YEAH, SO I, FOR THAT REASON, I WOULD MAKE A, OH, I CAN'T IF YOU HAVE TO WITHDRAW IT IN PER MR. COMMISSIONER Y'S PURVIEW TO, WELL, I, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDER, UH, CAN YOU GIVE ME THE TITLE OF THAT REPORT AND WHAT WAS IT MEANT TO DO? MY APOLOGIZE.
SO YOU HAVE THE, THE FINANCIAL SIDE OF THIS REPORT THAT AT THE TOP LOOKS SIMILAR.
SAME COMPANY COMPLETED BY THE PRINCIPAL OF FULFORD CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, PLLC, TRACY E FULFORD, CSPM.
AND AT THE TOP IT SAYS RENOVATION INSPECTION FOR THE CLIENT.
AND IT LAYS OUT THE IMAGES A LITTLE DIFFERENT WITH A LITTLE BIT OF NARRATIVE TO IT.
SO IN SUMMARY, IS IT MEANT TO DEMO THE HOUSE OR THE, THE, THE COST OF RESTORING THE HOUSE? IT, IT IS REGARDING ITS CURRENT CONDITION AND THE COST TO RESTORE THE HOUSE.
HE APPLIES THE INSPECTION REPORT JUST SAYS TO THE POINT WHERE, HEY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT WE SEE.
UH, THIS IS WHAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN TO GET THE PROPERTY UP, ALLOWED TO COME BACK AND SPEAK LIKE THIS PROPERTY STANDARDS WITHOUT BEING ASKED.
'CAUSE WE'VE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
SO THAT'S, THAT IS MISSING FROM YOUR, FROM YOUR DOCUMENT AND ALSO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, UH, ENFORCEMENT, I WILL STATE THAT WHILE THE PREVIOUS OWNER HAD THE PROPERTY, I THINK THERE, UM, THERE WERE SOME NOTICES ABOUT ITS CONDITION THAT HAD BEEN POSTED ON THERE.
SO, UH, NOT ALL OF THOSE THAT, WHAT ARE THEY? DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOODS FLAGGED THE PROPERTY A FEW TIMES.
IN FACT, WHAT HAPPENED IS SOMEONE ATTEMPTED TO BUILD
[01:20:01]
A NEW GARAGE IN THE BACK 11 YEARS AGO AND THAT WORK WAS STOPPED AND THEN IT WAS NEVER COMPLETED AND IT WAS TORN DOWN.WHY I'M STRUGGLING WITH THIS IS BECAUSE MY DECISION IS NOT GONNA CHANGE IF THE GUY COME BACK WITH A REPORT THAT SAYS THE COST IS 300 OR 500,000, WELL MINE, I CARE ABOUT THE HOUSE.
SO IF THAT'S THE CASE, I JUST THINK WE OWE HIM THAT.
IF IT WAS SOMETHING TO ME IS, IS DEMO OR DON'T DEMO BECAUSE OF THIS SO DETRIMENTAL, THEN I MAY, I MAY DO IT, BUT HEY, THERE WAS NO SECOND TO MY RECOMMENDATION.
WELL, I, I CUT OFF THE SECOND I, SO THAT THE ISSUE IS YEP.
FOR ME IS THAT THE, THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THAT THE COMMISSION VIEW THIS DOCUMENT.
SO I FEEL LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE OWE IT TO HIM AS THE APPLICANT TO ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, THE DOCUMENT THAT'S IN QUESTION.
I'M GONNA GIVE YOU FIRST RIGHTS.
DO YOU WANNA MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER OR WILL YOU UH, I DON'T WANNA BE ON RECORD TO DEFER.
SO, UM, MCNEIL MAKES A MOTION TO DEFER TO THIS OKAY.
WE KNOW WHERE JACKSON SECONDS, BUT, AND NOW I DO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
'CAUSE WHAT I DID WANT TO DO IN THIS WAS TO, TO ASK, UM, COMMISSIONER COSGROVE A QUESTION BECAUSE, UH, HE THAT A LOT OF QUESTIONS YOU'RE WELL, UM, BECAUSE YOU'RE IN THE REAL ESTATE BUSINESS AND YOU, YOU ARE OUR DE OUR DESIGNEE, UM, EXPERT ON OUR, ON OUR COMMISSION.
YOU AND I HAVE SEEN A FEW OF THESE THINGS HAPPEN IN OUR TIME HERE.
AND, UM, THE, WHAT, WHAT I'M STRUGGLING WITH AND WHAT WAS MENTIONED BY STAFF AND WHAT WAS MENTIONED BY THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION AND, AND THE PICTURES THAT I SAW IN WHAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION, UH, FOR THIS BALLOON FRAMING ARE ALL VERY REPAIRABLE.
UM, YOU REPLACE THE SIX BY SIX YOU SISTER ON THE SIDE OF THE JOIST.
I I'VE SEEN PROJECTS WHERE YOU COULDN'T WALK ACROSS THE FLOOR 'CAUSE YOU, THERE ARE HOLES IN THE FLOOR AND THOSE PROJECTS WERE REPAIRED AND THERE ARE NOW PEOPLE LIVE IN THOSE HOMES.
AND, AND SO AS I RECALL, AND AND YOU HAD TESTIFIED FOR THE COMMISSION MANY YEARS AGO WHEN THIS, UM, ECONOMIC HARDSHIP THRESHOLD IS, IT'S A PRETTY WEIGHTY THRESHOLD TO GET THROUGH, AS I RECALL.
I'M JUST CURIOUS IF YOU COULD REMIND THE COMMISSION ABOUT THE, THE OF THE, UH, YOUR, THE, WHAT THAT MEANS, THE OF ECONOMIC INFEASIBILITY.
UM, IS, IS IS THAT FAIR? YEAH, I MEAN I THINK THAT, THAT, I'VE ALWAYS LOOKED AT IT.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, AS WE SAID EARLIER, THIS BODY'S JOB IS TO PROTECT THE DISTRICT AND THE ASSETS IN THE DISTRICT.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT HERE TO ENSURE A POSITIVE RATE OF RETURN OR TO CORRECT SOMEONE'S BUSINESS DECISION THAT MAYBE WAS NOT PRUDENT AT THE TIME.
I MEAN, I WILL SAY ON THIS PARTICULAR, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE AN ESTIMATE TO DO AN ADDITION ON THIS HOUSE.
AND AT THE TOP OF THAT ESTIMATE, THERE ARE NUMBERS ABOUT, I GUESS COMPS THAT WOULD BE IF THE PROPERTY SOLD AND THEY'RE AT LIKE 1 1 7 AND 1 1 16 AND WE'RE LOOKING AT A CONSTRUCTION COST OF 5 0 5 AND AN INVESTMENT OF FOUR 15, I MEAN, WHICH IS A POSITIVE RATE OF RETURN.
SO THERE'S NO ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FROM THAT STANDPOINT AND I CAN'T PROFESSIONALLY COMMENT ABOUT THE APPRAISAL, BUT IT DOES HAVE A NUMBER ON THE BOTTOM OF IT, WHICH IS, APPEARS TO BE GREATER THAN WHAT THE PURCHASE PRICE WAS, WHICH ALSO INDICATES NO ECONOMIC HARDSHIP AS HE COULD SELL THE PROPERTY APPARENTLY FOR MORE THAN HE PAID FOR IT.
SO, I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE, THE REASONING BEHIND THE APPLICATION, YOU KNOW, FOR DEMOLITION BASED ON ECONOMIC HARDSHIP.
'CAUSE IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SUPPORTED BY THE, BY THIS DOCUMENT, UM, PREPARED BY THE FULFORD CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT COMPANY.
I JUST WANNA PUT THAT OUT THERE SO THAT IF WE'RE, IF WE ARE DEFERRING THE APPLICANT CAN HEAR THAT AND, AND MAKE SURE WE HAVE A, THE FULL, THE FULL INFORMATION, UH, WHEN IT COMES BACK.
SO ALL IN FAVOR OF DEFERRING, SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED? CAN I ABSTAIN? YOU MAY.
NO, UH, ALL THOSE WHO ABSTAIN I MADE OPPOSITE RECOMMENDATION.
SO I MAY YOU WANT TO ABSTAIN? I ABSTAIN.
BUT THE MOTION PASSES TO DEFER AND WE WILL NOW MOVE ON.
I'D LIKE TO ASK ONE ITEM FOR CLARIFICATION.
I WANNA CONFIRM WITH STAFF THAT WE HAVE THIS DOCUMENT ALREADY IN MR. MCALLEN'S OR STAFF'S FILES.
GENERALLY WHEN SOMETHING IS SHOWN ON THE DOCUMENT SCREEN, WE MAINTAIN AND KEEP THAT DOCUMENT.
[01:25:01]
THE APPLICANT WANTS TO HOLD ONTO THE COPY HE HAS.SO I WANNA CONFIRM THAT WE HAVE IT, THAT IT WAS SUBMITTED DIFFERENT FORMAT PRIOR TO THE MEETING THAT WE WILL YEAH, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO SIT AT MY LAPTOP AND MAKE THAT TERM.
I'LL GO THROUGH, IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT ITEM, I'LL LOOK FOR IT.
IF YOU'LL HANG ON AND, UH, TRY TO FIND IT, SEE IF WE CAN GET IT.
I COULD RUN UPSTAIRS AND GET A COPY MADE AND IF WE NEEDED TO DO THAT, UM, PERHAPS WE CAN TAKE A PHOTOGRAPH OF IT AS WELL.
UH, I, SO WE'RE GONNA MOVE ON TERRANCE, I BELIEVE TO ITEM NUMBER 13.
BET Y'ALL NEVER BEEN MORE HAPPY TO SEE ME, RIGHT,
GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERSONS AND MEMBERS OF THE HHC.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRENCE JACKSON.
AND TODAY I SUBMIT TO YOU ITEM A 13 AT 1115 EAST 11TH STREET, A CONTRIBUTING COMMERCIAL BUILDING LOCATED IN THE NOR HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A 2,598 SQUARE FOOT MASON COMMERCIAL BUILDING SITUATED ON A 5,000 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.
THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN CIRCA 1935.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REMODEL, IS PROPOSING A REMODEL OF THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE IN WHICH THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO INSTALL NEW DOORS AND WINDOWS ON THE FACADE FACING 11TH STREET REPAIR AND CONSTRUCT NEW EXTERIOR WALLS AT THE REAR AND SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO ADDRESS ISSUES OF STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY.
CONSTRUCT NEW ROOF TO REPLACE THE DEMOLISHED ROOF REPAINT EXISTING PAINTED BRICK DEMOLISHED A PORTION OF THE EXISTING EXTERIOR WALLS AND A FULL DEMOLITION OF THE INTERIOR WALLS.
INSTALL NEW TRANSOM WINDOWS OVER THE EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOORS.
STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OF THE COA, THE CONDITIONS ARE RETAIN AND REPAIR THE WOOD FRAMES OF THE WINDOWS AND TRANSOMS AND FINISHED WITH PRIMARY AND PAINT.
NO WINDOWS TRANSOMS OR FRAMES TO BE REPLACED WITHOUT APPROVAL FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION STAFF.
UM, AND, UH, CHAIR MEMBERS OF HHC.
UM, THE AGENT AND THE CONTRACTOR WERE SUPPOSED TO BE HERE, BUT THEY'RE NOT AVAILABLE.
BUT I AM AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.
AND THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER SIGNED UP, SO I'M GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND INVITE VIRGINIA KELSEY TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.
IF YOU COULD RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD AND THEN I'LL HAVE SOME QUESTIONS.
I AM THE VP OF DEED RESTRICTIONS FOR NOR HILL.
UM, ONE THING I WANNA COMMENT ABOUT FIRST IS JUST THAT, UM, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE OF THESE CASES.
UH, ACTUALLY THE LAST ONE WAS TWO WHERE THE PROPERTY, UM, PAPERWORK AND EVERYTHING WERE NOT SENT TO NOR HILL UNTIL WE ASKED FOR IT, WHICH WAS AFTER FRIDAY.
UM, AND SO WE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WHEN WE HEARD THAT IT WAS UP FOR AGENDA.
UH, WE HAD A BOARD MEETING THIS WEEK.
THERE'S SOME INFORMATION THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE PROVIDED BEFORE WE COULD GIVE APPROVAL FROM NOR HILL.
UH, TO FULLY UNDERSTAND THE EXTENT OF THE NEW, UM, CONSTRUCTION, IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE BUILDING WAS COMPLETELY DEMOLISHED EXCEPT FOR THE FRONT WALL.
UM, PRIOR TO, UH, ANYTHING BEING SUBMITTED TO Y'ALL, UH, AND SOMEBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALERTED US AND WE ALERTED HOP, THEY PUT, UH, A, A A A SIGN UP TO STOP THE DEMOLITION OF THE FRONT FACADE, WHICH WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO, UM, PROCEED WITH.
SO IT'S JUST A VERY PROACTIVE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT KEPT THE FRONT FACADE IN PLACE.
UM, CONCEPTUALLY THE PROPOSED DESIGN SEEMS TO BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE FRONT FACADE, NOR HILL APPRECIATES THE INTENT TO RETURN THE OPENINGS TO THEIR ORIGINAL DESIGN WITH WOOD WINDOWS AND DIVIDED LIKE TRANSOMS, THE DISCOVERED TRANSOM
[01:30:01]
WINDOWS WITH COPPER SCREENS, UM, THAT WERE UNCOVERED SHOULD BE RETAINED.UM, THERE IS NO INFORMATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED FOR THE PROPOSED CANVAS AWNINGS THAT ARE NOTED ON THE DRAWINGS.
I SENT AN EMAIL TO THEM ASKING WHAT THE DESIGN IS AND THEY HAVE NOT GOTTEN BACK TO US ANY AWNING? I'M GONNA GRANT THE SPEAKER MORE TIME.
IS THERE A SECOND JOHN? SECONDS.
ANY AWNING SIGNAGE OR LIGHTED LIGHTING SHOULD BE SUBMITTED IN DETAIL FOR APPROVAL.
IT'S AN IMPORTANT FACADE ON THE FRONT OF THE STREET.
IT'S AN, YOU KNOW, A HISTORIC, UM, ORIGINAL SET OF BUILDINGS.
THE SPECIFIC DESIGN OF THESE ELEMENTS ON THE FACADE MUST BE APPROPRIATE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE ENCOURAGE THOSE INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN TO LOOK AT EXAMPLES FOUND ON OTHER HISTORIC BUILDINGS.
YOU CAN SEE THE FRONT FACADE WHERE A HANGING CANOPY MAY HAVE BEEN, PERHAPS RETURNING THIS FEATURE WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.
AND IN KEEPING WITH THE ADJACENT BUILDINGS, UH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ALSO COMMENT THAT ITEM NUMBER SIX WAS MISLABELED AND WE DID NOT KNOW IT WAS IN NOR HILL.
UM, THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED TO US.
AND I JUST NOTE THAT I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAN BE BROUGHT BACK UP.
I'M, ROMAN TOLD ME I COULDN'T, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE THAT COMMENT.
WHILE THE PUBLIC IS HEARING IS OPEN, I'LL ASK IF ANYONE ELSE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER.
AND I'M NOT SEEING ANY, ANYONE ELSE EXCEPT ONE MORE MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE.
SO I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
TERRANCE, I KNOW THAT WE'LL HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS HERE.
THIS IS A, THIS IS A DEMOLITION OF ALL, BUT THE, UH, FRONT WALL, I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE ONE OR TWO COLUMNS FREESTANDING STILL? YES, SIR.
OR, AND ARE THEY MADE OUTTA WOOD OR STEEL OR WHAT, WHAT ARE THEY COMPOSED OF? UH, THEY WERE STEEL COLUMN FROM WHAT I COULD SEE.
AND BUT THE MASONRY WALL THAT WAS VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE FRONT FACADE HAS BEEN REMOVED PARTIALLY.
DO WE HAVE ANY PHOTOS OF THAT TERRANCE? I LEFT ELEVATION THAT SIDE ELEVATION? YEAH, THE WOULD BE THE WEST.
THAT'S THAT THROUGH, THAT'S LOOKING THROUGH THE WINDOW AT THE TOP PHOTO.
UH, AND I WOULD SAY IT PROBABLY GOES ABOUT 15, 20 FEET BACK BEFORE THEY STARTED THE DEMO.
AND THERE WAS NO COA NO PERMIT FOR THE DEMO.
SO THEY, THEY, UM, THEY GOT A PERMIT FOR A REMODEL.
UM, I ACTUALLY RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM, UM, OUR INSPECTOR, PETE STOCKTON AND ANOTHER GENTLEMAN, UM, A STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED ON DECEMBER 11TH, WHICH WAS YESTERDAY.
UM, BECAUSE THEY, THEY GOT A REMODEL PERMIT AND THEY EXTENDED THE SCOPE OF WORK.
HOW DID THEY GET A, A PERMIT WITHOUT GETTING A C OF A IF IT'S IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT? WELL, THERE WAS JUST GONNA BE AN INTERIOR REMODEL.
SO STILL A HARD HOLD ON A REPAIR.
YEAH, WE, WHEN WE GET THOSE CALLS, IF IT'S A INTERIOR REMODEL, WE JUST TALK TO THE, THE APPLICANT OR THE AGENT OR THE OWNER AND THEY JUST TELL US THAT IT'S AN INTERIOR REMODEL AND IT'S UP TO THE INSPECTORS FROM THERE.
SO WOULD THIS BE COR? THAT'S WHAT, 'CAUSE THEY DEMOLISH STUFF WITHOUT ASKING PERMISSION.
SO FROM, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS A, EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN VIEW FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY IS STILL UP.
WE CAN'T SEE THE ROOF FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY SEE THE PORTION OF THE WALL BECAUSE THE WEST WALL THAT WAS DEMOLISHED, THEY DEMOLISHED IT FROM THE BACK FORWARD.
YOU CAN STILL SEE FROM, FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY YOU CAN STILL SEE THAT WALL.
SO ACCORDING TO US, UM, THERE'S REALLY NOT MUCH WE CAN DO.
BUT IF LEGALLY, IF I CAN ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN, KIM.
UM, MY UNDERSTANDING, I, I REMEMBER THE WILD WEST WHEN IF YOU KEPT ONE STUD, YOU CALLED IT A, YOU KNOW, A, IT WAS NOT DEMOLITION, BUT THE CITY CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION.
UH, I THOUGHT TO WHEN, WHEN A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE BUILDING IS REMOVED.
UM, AND SO I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE CAN, UH, JUST UNDERSTAND THE DEFINITION OF, OF THAT.
BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS YOU CAN STILL SEE PORTIONS OF THE WALL THAT USED TO, THAT HAVE BEEN REMOVED, PARTS OF THE WALL THAT HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
WERE WERE ACTUALLY VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
IS THAT, IS THAT TRUE OR NOT TRUE? BECAUSE INTERIOR MODELING DOESN'T AFFECT THE, THE ROOF OR THE, OR THE ENVELOPE.
[01:35:01]
AND SO, RIGHT, SO I WANT TO, I KNOW THIS IS A QUESTION, IT'S LEGAL, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I, I, UH, 'CAUSE I DON'T THINK I STATED IT INITIALLY.UM, IN THE EMAIL, AS PER PETE STOCKTON, HE SAID THAT BASED ON THE DEFINITIONS FOR INSPECTORS, THE REASON WHY THE STOP WORK ORDER HAS BEEN ISSUED IS BECAUSE OF, UM, THE FACT THAT THE EXTENT THAT THE FACT THAT THEY EXCEEDED THE SCOPE, UH, PUT IT UNDER THAT DEFINITION OF DEMO AS PER INSPECTORS.
SO HE SAID, AND I'LL QUOTE THIS STOP WORK ORDER HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HISTORIC, IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH THE DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION AS PER INSPECTIONS.
BUT, BUT HISTORIC HAS A DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION.
AND I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS MET OR NOT MET.
JUST, JUST FOR THE RECORD, I, I DO NOT BELIEVE, AND I WENT OVER THIS WITH STAFF AND, AND WE DISCUSSED THIS AT LENGTH, I THINK THAT STAFF WAS CORRECT IN THEIR ASSESSMENT OF WHAT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY, THE DEMOLITION, AND I DON'T NECESSARILY CALL IT THAT, BUT ONCE YOU DO WORK ON A STRUCTURE THAT EXCEEDS MORE THAN 51% OF THE VALUE, YOU MUST COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CODE REQUIREMENTS, PLUMBING, FIRE, INGRESS, EGRESS, ALL OF THAT.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT BUILDING IS LOOKING AT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
I UNDERSTAND POINT, THE THING I WANNA MAKE SURE IS THAT THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN OUR, IN OUR COMMISSION THAT IF A DEMOLITION OCCURS MM-HMM
THERE VERY STRICT LIMITATIONS ARE APPLIED TO THE PROPERTY ON HOW IT CAN BE USED OR REBUILT OR EVEN WHEN IT CAN BE REBUILT.
AND I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, UM, THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN A HOUSE THAT HAS, THAT HAS FOUR SIDES.
AND YOU CAN SEE AT LEAST THREE SIDES FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
BUT I, BUT THIS ONE HAS A FRONT FACADE AND A SIDE ALSO SEEN FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
AND PART OF THAT SIDE HAS BEEN REMOVED.
THAT WAS VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY NONETHELESS.
SO IN THE PICTURE THAT I SAW, SO TH THIS IS WHERE I'M CONCERNED BECAUSE THE, YOU KNOW, AND OF COURSE THE WHOLE FRONT WOULDN'T EVEN BE HERE IF IT WASN'T FOR A CALL.
UM, SO I I I'M, IT, I'M JUST HAVING A HARD TIME THAT IT'S, I I THINK IT'S A C OF R AS WELL.
BUT YOU KNOW, AND I, I CAN BE WRONG.
SO I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE SEE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT HAS BEEN AFFECTED.
'CAUSE THAT, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE HOLDING ONTO IS WHAT YOU SEE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE UM, CAN WE PUT UP THE SIDEWALL PHOTOGRAPH FOR THAT PURPOSE? UH, I THINK, I THINK, UH, UH, MR. CHAIR, IF WE CAN LOOK AT PAGE 13 OF 16, MAYBE TERRANCE CAN, UH, ARM WAVE AND TELL US WHERE WHAT IS STILL REMAINING AND WHAT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY TORN DOWN.
I'D LIKE TO POINT OUT TOO THAT ON THIS ISSUE OF THE DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION, THE REMOVAL OF THE ROOF AND THE REAR HOLD ON RIGHT THERE.
AND SIDE WALLS COMPROMISES THE REST OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC MATERIALS.
SO THE DETERIORATION OF THE FRONT FACADE AND WHAT IS REMAINING IS EXPEDITED BY THE FACT THAT THE ROOF HAS BEEN REMOVED AND THE REAR WALL HAS BEEN REMOVED.
I THINK THAT, UM, WELL IT PROBABLY DOES FALL UNDER THE, PER THE, THAT PART OF OUR ORDINANCE.
IT, THEY'RE NOT REQUESTING TO DO ANYTHING BEYOND RESTORE IT BACK TO WHAT IT WAS.
SO, I MEAN, THAT PART OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD KICK IN.
I MEAN, WITH THE HOUSE ON HEIGHTS BOULEVARD, WE ONLY TOLD THEM THEY COULD BUILD BACK WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
I MEAN, WE DO KIND OF KNOW WHAT WAS THERE BEFORE.
AND IT'S CERTAINLY WITHIN OUR PURVIEW TO SAY THAT THAT WALL NEEDS TO BE AS IT WAS WHEN IT WAS BUILT, BUT IT'S NOT.
BUT THEY'RE ALSO ASKING TO BUILD BACK MUCH LARGER THAN IT WAS BEFORE, WHICH IS NOT ALLOWED UNDER A DEMOLITION.
UM, I MEAN, THIS COMMISSION DOESN'T HAVE MANY REMEDIES FOR EVENTS THAT HAPPEN WITHOUT APPROVAL.
AND SO, BUT THIS IS ONE THAT WE HAVE AND I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT BECAUSE WE DO REGULATE THE ENVELOPE OF A STRUCTURE, UM, THE, THE ROOF CHANGES TO THE ROOF, UM, PROTECT WHAT'S UNDERNEATH THE WALLS.
I MEAN, WE REGULATE SHIPLAP ON HOMES BECAUSE IT, IT IS STRUCTURALLY HOLDING OUT THE OUTSIDE ENVELOPE OF THE STRUCTURE.
SO, UM, I JUST DON'T WANNA GLOSS OVER THIS.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THIS CORRECTLY.
WHAT'S ON THE SCREEN? CAN WE HAVE A LOOK AT THE, THE, THE ELEVATION ON PAGE 13? SORRY.
UM, SO JUST GOING TO THE SCREEN, THAT'S THROUGH ONE
[01:40:01]
OF THE WINDOWS, THE BACK WALL AND UM, YEAH, I THINK, AND SO THAT'S, SO THAT'S THE BACK WALL, WHICH IS TOTALLY GONE.AND THEN THE WALL TO THE LEFT WILL BE THE WEST WALL, WHICH I MEAN, YOU SEE SOME OF IT IS THERE.
UM, AND AGAIN, THEY DEMOLISHED FROM THE BACK FORWARD.
AND, AND EVEN IN SOME OF THE OTHER PICTURES THAT ARE IN THE REPORT, YOU CAN TELL THAT THE, THE REAR WALL WAS IN, IN BAD SHAPE IN INITIALLY ANYWAY.
UM, SO I MEAN, AGAIN, WHEN, WHEN, WHEN STAFF WENT OUT, OUR INITIAL CONCERN WAS THE FRONT FACADE.
UM, AND ONCE WE SAW THAT THE FRONT FACADE FACADE WAS UP, UH, AND HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH, UH, MR. STOCKTON AND ALSO WITH THE AGENT, UM, AND HER GUARANTEEING THAT THEY WERE GOING TO LEAVE THE FACADE UP, THEY WOULD STOP DOING EVERYTHING.
THEY WOULD DO WHATEVER WE ASKED THEM TO DO.
UM, SO WITH THOSE THINGS IN COMBINATION, I THINK, UM, BASED AND BASED ON WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING, UM, STAFF WAS FINE WITH GOING WITH AN APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS.
UM, IF IT NEEDS TO BE A CR IF YOU GUYS DETERMINE IT NEEDS TO BE A CR OR COR, THEN YOU KNOW, WE'LL, WE'LL BE FINE WITH THAT.
HEY, TERRANCE, CAN WE DEFINE HOW MUCH OF THE SIDEWALL IS STILL STANDING QUESTION THAT THAT WAS VISIBLE FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY? THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO LOOK AT.
THE ELEVATION ON PAGE 13 AND YOU TELLING ME WHAT IS THE REMAINING ON THAT WALL, PLEASE? I, I CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
I WAS OUT AT THE SITE RECENTLY AND UH, YOU, YOU'RE LOOKING ON YOUR LEFT OF THIS IMAGE AND YOU SEE THE BLACK WALL THAT IT BECOMES PERPENDICULAR, RIGHT? THAT THAT WALL IS INTACT FROM THE FRONT ELEVATION OF THE BUILDING.
TO THAT POINT, BEYOND THAT POINT, THERE'S A SHORTER WALL THAT I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE THE SANDBORN AVAILABLE, BUT I BELIEVE IT, IN MY OPINION, PROBABLY THIS IS GONNA BE THE ORIGINAL THAT BLACK SP UH, BLACK PERPENDICULAR WALL WOULD'VE BEEN THE ORIGINAL END OF THAT BUILDING.
AND SO THE WALL THOUGH, THAT GOES BEHIND PAST THAT IS A MASONRY WALL AND IT'S PARTIALLY KNOCKED DOWN.
IT'S, IT'S, I DON'T KNOW ITS ORIGINAL HEIGHT, BUT IT'S DOWN TO ABOUT FIVE OR SIX FEET.
CAN YOU SHOW ME ON PAGE 13 OF 26, LET'S GO BACK THERE.
ARE WE GONNA DO OVER HERE? YOU WANT AN ELEVATION DRAWING OR PHOTOGRAPHS? YEAH, BECAUSE THE ELEVATION IS ON THE TOP.
SO WHERE IS THAT WALL NOW THAT'S GONE AND WHAT IS STILL EXISTING BASED ON THE TOP PICTURE? SURE.
SO THE TALLER, OKAY, SO THIS IS GOOD TOO.
AND THIS SPEAKS TO WHAT ORIGINAL MATERIAL WAS THERE OR NOT.
YOU SEE THE, HOW THE, FROM THE FRONT FACADE, THE, UM, THE BUILDING, I'M TALKING ABOUT THE TOP IMAGE NOW HERE, THE EXISTING THE, AT THE, AT THE PARA PITT LEVEL, UH, THE, THE BUILDING COMES BACK WITH A SLOPE, RIGHT? THE, THE, THE WALL THAT'S A LITTLE LIGHTER, ALL THAT WHOLE TALLER PORTION THAT IS STILL INTACT AND IN PLACE THERE.
SO THE SHORTER WALL BEYOND THAT IS PARTIALLY DEMOLISHED.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE THE HEIGHT I WAS ABOUT RIGHT.
IT'S ABOUT SIX FOOT FIVE, SIX FEET AND PART OF THAT WALL IS GONE.
AND ROMAN, I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE A MOUSE.
MR. JACKSON, CAN I CLARIFY? SURE.
'CAUSE I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE DESCRIPTION OF THE PICTURE.
SO IS IT ROUGHLY FROM THE, ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU HAVE WHAT LOOKS LIKE A BRICK WALL OR CONCRETE BLOCK WALL MAYBE IS CORRECT THAT STILL A STANDING, IS THAT AT THE FRONT? YES, COMPLETELY STANDING.
SO WHERE DOES IT START? IS IT AT RIGHT AT THAT EDGE THERE? IS IT WELL, THAT, WHERE THE MOUSE IS RIGHT THERE IS THE BLACK PERPENDICULAR WALL THAT, THAT GOES INWARD.
AND THEN GOING TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE LOT FROM THERE, DO IT, THE UPPER PORTION OF THAT WALL IS DOWN.
ALL THIS IS EXISTING AND, AND JUST, I THINK I'M ORIENTED, BUT LET'S MAKE SURE WE ALL ARE THE, THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS ELEVATION.
ALL OF THIS IS TERRANCE, THE FAR RIGHT SIDE OF THE ELEVATION, THAT'S THE STREET FACE, RIGHT? YES.
THAT'S, THAT'S THE STREET FACE.
AND ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED.
AND THAT'S THE SIDE THAT'S VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, FROM THE RIGHT OF WAY? YES.
IS THERE, I JUST LIKE FOR US TO, TO, I MEAN I, I HEAR WHAT STAFF IS SAYING AND, AND UM, AND THE APPLICANT'S WILLINGNESS TO PRESERVE THE FRONT FACADE, BUT WE'VE LOST A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF HISTORIC MATERIAL HERE.
THE FRONT FACADE IS IN JEOPARDY.
IT COULD FALL IN FIVE MINUTES BECAUSE THE STRUCTURE OF THE BUILDING HAS BEEN REMOVED HAS BEEN THE ROOF DEMOLISHED.
NOT ONLY HAS THE ROOF BEEN REMOVED, WHICH IS EXPOSING THAT EXISTING BRICK AND MATERIALS TO INCREASE DETERIORATION, ADVANCED DETERIORATION, BUT STRUCTURALLY THAT BUILDING ONLY WORKS IF
[01:45:01]
ALL FOUR SIDES ARE THERE PLUS THE ROOF.AND IF THREE OF THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED, THEN WE'VE SEEN IT JUST IN THE PAST YEAR, A FACADE CRUMBLE.
THREE, TWO HAVE THEM REMOVED, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THE REST OF THE BUILDING WAS STRUCTURALLY AND A HALF DEMOLISHED.
I, WE CAN'T LET THIS KEEP HAPPENING WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I I WE HAVE TO STRIKE A BALANCE IN MY OPINION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO PRESERVE WHAT'S THERE, BUT ALSO MAKING A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO ALLOW THIS CONTINUED DEMOLITION UNDER, OOPS, I DIDN'T KNOW, OR IT WAS A REMODEL OR I JUST DIDN'T LIKE IT BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO LOSE SIGNIFICANT HISTORIC FABRIC AND EVEN FACADES IF WE, IF WE LET THIS SLIDE.
WELL, AND AND I'LL SAY TWO THINGS.
ONE, UH, IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WAS JUST SAID, I MEAN, THE ROOF ITSELF IS A DIAPHRAGM THAT DOES HOLD THAT FRONT WALL FROM FALLING OVER.
NOW ROMAN, YOU SAID SOMETHING EARLIER THAT THE ORIGINAL BUILDING ON THE SANDBORN, I BELIEVE YOU SAID WAS, WAS CONFINED TO THIS, THIS AREA OF THE FRONT AND SIDEWALL THAT IS STILL STANDING.
AND CAN YOU PUT THE SANDBORN UP AND CAN YOU, CAN YOU, CAN YOU DETERMINE THAT THE AMOUNT OF THE REMAINING WALLS THAT WERE DEMOLISHED WERE NOT IN THE ORIGINAL BUILDING QUESTION? I THINK STAFF'S WORKING ON GETTING THE SANDBORN, BUT I JUST WANT TO COMMENT, DON'T WANNA LET IT STAND.
THE REAR WALL, THE, THE BUILDING IS ATTACHED TO THE ADJACENT BUILDING, WHICH IS BEING RENOVATED.
UM, AND SO IT'S JUST PART, NOW I WOULDN'T EVEN SAY IT'S HALF OF THE WEST WALL THAT IS, IS DOWN.
BUT I WANT TO COME BACK TO THE, TO THE WHERE WE STAND AS STAFF VISIBLE FROM THE STREET ARE ORDINANCES, ALTERATIONS THAT ARE NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
I'M SORRY, IT'S NOT EVEN VISIBILITY.
LET'S, THE STATEMENT IS ALTERATIONS THAT OBSCURED FROM THE STREET BY THE HISTORIC ORIGINAL BUILDING, UH, ARE NOT SOMETHING WE COVER.
THE, THE, THE, THE PRESERVATION ORDERS DOES NOT KICK IN.
SO THIS COULD, THIS IS A BUILDING PERMITTING ISSUE AND BUILDING PERMITTING.
I UNDERSTAND FROM PETE, MR. STOCKTON, THAT THEY'RE GONNA TREAT IT LIKE NEW CONSTRUCTION.
THEY'RE NOT GONNA REQUIRE HIM TO PUT BACK THE FRONT FACADE, BUT FOR THEM IT'S THAT FOR US IT'S NOT.
UM, AND I JUST WANNA SAY FOR THE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE CAN GO A LOT OF DIFFERENT WAYS HERE, RIGHT? BUT WHERE THIS APPLICANT IS RIGHT NOW ON THIS BUILDING AND SPEAKING OF ITS, UH, POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW, IF A STORM CAME THROUGH, THANK GOODNESS WE'RE THROUGH THE WIND, WE'RE THROUGH THE HURRICANE SEASON.
BUT LET'S GET THIS, I STAB WITH ALL RE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, UH, WE'RE ASKING TO GET THIS C IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT A CFR, LET'S CALL THE CFR PLEASE.
BUT FOR US, THIS IS A BUILDING THAT'S, IT'S READY TO GO.
IT'S GOT REALLY SIMPLY, UNBELIEVABLY GORGEOUS, INTACT TRANSOMS. I I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING THAT PERFECTLY IN ENCASED IN TIME.
SO I'D LIKE TO JUST SEE IT STAND.
IS THERE ROMAN, I I REALLY, I'M SORRY.
I, I'VE, I I DON'T THINK THIS IS JUST SEMANTICS.
THE BUILDING IS THE REAR WALL AND THE ROOF.
IT'S NOT JUST WHAT IS SEEN FROM THE, FROM THE STREET.
IT IS THE ENTIRE ENVELOPE OF THE STRUCTURE.
AND I THINK TO ME THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT THIS COMMISSION AND STAFF ARE, ARE, ARE, UM, SHARE THAT SAME DEFINITION.
AND, AND IF WE DON'T ALL AGREE, THEN WE NEED TO GO INTO A WORKSHOP AND, AND DEFINE THAT BECAUSE THE BUILDING IS OUR PURVIEW.
AND YES, THIS IS COMING TO US IN DECEMBER, BUT IF IT HAD COME TO US IN JUNE, THERE IS A VERY GOOD POSSIBILITY THAT THAT FACADE WOULD NOT BE THERE.
UH, I WOULD ALSO THEN LIKE TO ADD THAT, YOU KNOW, WE LET THE LA UH, THE LADY IN GLEN VISTA GO BACK AND WE DEMAND DRAWINGS FROM HER BECAUSE WE WANNA SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING TO NOT JUST THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE CANNOT CHANGE WINDOWS ON THE SIDE THAT IS VIEWABLE FROM THE CITY OR FROM ON THE STREET FOR ANY HISTORICAL HOMES THAT WE, YOU KNOW, THAT PEOPLE WOULD HAVE LOVED TO CHANGE WINDOWS.
SO WHY IS THIS ANY DIFFERENT? RIGHT? SO TO ME, IF, IF THAT'S THE CASE, I I, UH, IF THAT THING WAS TORN DOWN, QUOTE UNQUOTE ILLEGALLY, NUMBER ONE THERE SHOULD BE A COR.
AND NUMBER TWO, I FEEL THAT THEY SHOULD RESTORE BACK THAT BUILDING.
BECAUSE AGAIN, THE OTHER THING THAT, THE OTHER THING THAT CAME TO OUR PURVIEW IS THAT THIS THING BECAME HISTORICAL AT THE TIME OF NOT OF CONSTRUCTION, BUT AT THE TIME WHEN IT WAS DESIGNATED HISTORIC, JUST LIKE WHAT WE SAID
[01:50:01]
TO THE GLEN VISTA THING, NOT AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION, BUT AT THE TIME OF DESIGNATION.SO THIS THING WAS ALREADY DESIGNATED HISTORIC, THE ENTIRE SITE FACADE AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED.
AND I THINK THEY SHOULD RE REBUILD BACK THE ENTIRE SITE.
SO ROMAN, IS THERE A FLOOR PLAN SHOWING EXISTING PLAN VERSUS WHAT'S NEW? BECAUSE I SEE EXISTING IN NEW ELEVATIONS, BUT I DON'T SEE AN EXISTING FLOOR PLAN AND A NEW TO COMPARE TO THE NEW FLOOR PLAN.
ARE THEY JUST REBUILDING BACK ON THE SAME FOOTPRINT? 'CAUSE 'CAUSE ON THE, ON THE BACK VIEW, DRAWING ON PAGE 12 OF 16 THERE, THERE'S NOTES THAT SAY TO FILL IN EXISTING WINDOWS.
SO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE WHAT THE PLAN IS.
'CAUSE IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S REFERRING TO EXISTING WALLS ON THAT DRAWING.
WELL, I MEAN THEY'VE DEMOLISHED THOSE WALLS, SO, UH, BUT SO CAN'T, SO MY QUESTION IS, ARE THEY REBUILDING THE BUILDING IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT OR ARE THEY EXPANDING IT TO THE REAR? I'M SORRY.
SO INITIALLY YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT THE REAR WALL, CORRECT? YEAH.
SO I'M ASKING IS THERE A FLOOR PLAN THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING REAR WALLS? NO, THERE ARE, THERE IS NO FLOOR PLAN THAT SHOWS THE EXISTING WALLS.
HOW, HOW COME THERE'S EXISTING PLANS FOR THE ELEVATIONS, BUT NOT THE FLOOR PLAN.
WELL, I MEAN BY, BY THE TIME WE GOT THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, THE WALLS WERE DEMOLISHED.
SO I HAD NO WAY OF VERIFYING THAT EVEN IF, EVEN IF THAT WERE THE CASE.
SO THEN HOW COME THEY HAVE ELEVATIONS THAT SAY EXISTING AND PROPOSED? HOW COULD THEY HAVE ELEVATIONS NOT A FLOOR PLAN? THEY HAVE, THEY HAVE A PROPOSED SITE PLAN, PROPOSED ROOF PLAN, BUT WE DON'T HAVE EXISTING.
BUT THEY, BUT THEY HAVE EXISTING ELEVATIONS, RIGHT? YOU CAN'T DRAW ELEVATIONS UNLESS YOU HAVE A FLOOR PLAN.
HOW, HOW DO THEY DRAW THE ELEVATIONS WITHOUT A FLOOR PLAN? WE HAVE A PROPOSED I THAT I CANNOT ANSWER IN THE ARCHITECTS IS NOT HEAR THE ANSWER.
UM, I MEAN THE, THE FOUNDATIONS WERE STILL VISIBLE FOR WHERE THE REAR DEMOLITION OCCURRED, I ASSUME.
CORRECT, BUT OKAY, SO I'VE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO MEET THE AGENT AT THE SITE OR THE CONTRACTOR AT THE SITE.
SO IT'S LOCKED UP AND I'M NOT WALKING, I CAN'T WALK ON THE PROPERTY THAT I HAVE.
YOUR PHOTOGRAPH IS THROUGH A WINDOW OPENING, RIGHT? SO I'M, I'M TAKING PHOTOGRAPHS THROUGH A WINDOW.
UM, I'M SORRY, BUT THAT, THOSE, THOSE THAT WAS THE HAND THAT I WAS DEALT.
AND, UM, IF YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO PRESS THE AGENT CONTRACTOR TO MEET THEM THERE TO SEE IF I CAN, UH, PINPOINT EXACTLY WHERE THE EXISTING WALLS WERE AND ASK THEM TO PROVIDE AN EXISTING FLOOR PLAN, I'D BE MORE THAN WILLING TO DO SO.
WELL, COULD, COULD WE, COULD WE DEFER? I FEEL LIKE WE'RE MISSING SOME IMPORTANT INFORMATION BECAUSE COMMISSIONER ZE WAS TALKING ABOUT IF THEY'RE EXPANDING THE FOOTPRINT AND THEY'VE DONE ANY LEGAL DEMOLITION, WE CAN STOP THEM FROM DOING THAT.
AND IF WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT IS, BUT WE KNOW SOME OF THE EXISTING INFORMATION, THESE, THESE DRAWINGS JUST SEEM VERY INCONSISTENT TO ME AND I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO INFORMATION ABOUT CANVAS AWNINGS THAT AREN'T ON THIS, THIS DRAWINGS, AND WE DON'T HAVE THE SANDBORN MAPS.
I, I FEEL LIKE THIS APPLICATION IS INCOMPLETE.
CAN I JUST SAY THAT THE SANDBORN MAPS ONLY SHOW A BLANK SCALE, UH, A BLANK, UH, LAYOUT OF THE PARKING LOT.
THEY DO NOT SHOW THE BUILDING UNFORTUNATELY.
SO IT WOULD DO YOU NO PURPOSE TO LOOK AT THE, UH, SANDBORN MAP UNFORTUNATELY.
SO CONNECT, CONNECT SOME DOTS HERE.
UM, SO IF WE'RE USING THE PRESERVATION ORDINANCES DEFINITION OF DEMOLITION, THEN WE COULD POTENTIALLY TRIGGER THE DELAY OR THE, THE PENALTY IN REBUILDING OR BEYOND THE ORIGINAL FOOTPRINT, WHICH, BUT WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE AN EXISTING SITE PLAN.
AND I'M, I I'M, I'M WORRIED WE'RE NEVER GONNA KNOW IF THEY'VE DEMOLISHED IT AND THEY DIDN'T DO THE DRAWING BEFORE.
WELL, I THINK THEY HAVE A DRAWING BECAUSE THEY HAVE EXISTING ELEVATIONS THAT ARE PRETTY DETAILED ON THIS APPLICATION.
SO I THINK THERE IS AN EXISTING FLOOR PLAN.
'CAUSE YOU CAN'T DRAW AN ELEVATION WITHOUT THE FLOOR PLAN.
WELL I THINK THERE'S STILL, FOUNDATIONS ARE STILL THERE BUSY HAVING SPENT THREE SUMMERS IN ROME, OUTSIDE ROME, DIGGING IN THE DIRT, UM, REESTABLISHING BUILDINGS FROM JUST FOUNDATIONS.
I THINK THERE'S A WAY THAT WE CAN REQUEST THOSE DRAWINGS OF THE, WHAT THE PREVIOUS CONDITION WAS.
THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO NOTE.
MY MY ONLY THING THAT I'M, UH, TRYING TO PARSE ABOUT THE ROOF IS THAT IN A HOME THAT'S BALLOON FRAMED, WE REGULATE THE SHIPLAP EVEN THOUGH IT'S ON THE INSIDE BECAUSE IT HOLDS UP THE ENVELOPE.
AND IF THEY WANTED TO REPLACE THE ROOF, THEY COULD DO THAT AND THEY COULD DO IT WITH, WITH A AA.
THEY WOULDN'T NEED TO COME TO HERE BECAUSE UNLESS THEY'RE CHANGING THE, THE FLAT ROOF TO SOME OTHER KIND OF ROOF, THAT'S THE ONLY REASON THEY WOULD COME HERE.
BUT THE ROOF HAD A STRUCTURAL VALUE BECAUSE IT HOLDS UP
[01:55:01]
THE FRONT WHEN THE WIND BLOWS.IT'S WHAT KEEPS THAT WALL FROM FALLING DOWN AND IT IS IN DANGER OF FALLING NOW.
UM, AND SO THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S A CONCERN.
SO I DO, I THINK THERE MAY BE MORE DISCUSSION DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS WAS A DEMOLITION OR NOT A DEMOLITION, BUT I DO THINK IT'S AN INCOMPLETE APPLICATION IS WHAT I'M HEARING.
I I THINK I HAVE A MOTION TO DEFER.
I KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF, I DON'T KNOW IF WE GET TO THE DEMOLITION POINT OF THE CODE.
MAYBE WE DO, BUT I WANNA REITERATE SECTION 33, 2 37 A TWO A TWO SAYS AN ALTERATION THAT IS OBSCURED FROM VIEW FROM THE STREET BY THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE AND NOT MERELY OBSCURED BY FENCING, LANDSCAPING DOCUMENT CAMERA PLEASE.
NON HISTORIC IONS OR OTHER IMPERMANENT OBSTRUCTIONS.
UH, IT, I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GET TO THE DEMOLITION PART OF THE ORDINANCE.
FOR ME, IT DEFINITELY, ARGUABLY IT, UH, ARGUABLY DOESN'T NEED A C OF A FOR THE WORK THAT WAS DONE.
AND THIS HAPPENS, WE, WE, WE TAKE CALLS FROM PERMITTING.
WE, WHEN THEY SAY, WELL WE HAVE A REPAIR PER SPEC LIST, SO WE'LL ASK THE PERSON HANDLING PERMITTING OVER ON WASHINGTON, COULD YOU, COULD YOU SHARE THE SPEC LIST WHAT YOU GOT ON IT? AND THEY'LL GO DOWN THAT LIST.
AND IF, IF EVERYTHING IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE OBSCURED FROM STREET, UH, FROM THE STREET, UH, THEN WE RELEASE THE HOLD THAT'S ON THE HISTORIC PROPERTY.
WE DO, I DON'T KNOW, QUITE A FEW OF THOSE A DAY.
I DON'T KNOW IF THE AVERAGE IS SIX OR EIGHT OF 'EM A DAY, BUT THERE'S A NUMBER OF THOSE THAT WE DO.
AND NOW IN THIS CASE, IDEALLY WE WOULD'VE RECEIVED THAT.
UM, BUT YOU'RE MENTIONING SEVERAL TIMES THE CONDITION OF THE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE WALL DOESN'T HAVE THAT DIAPHRAGM NOW.
AND THAT TO ME MAKES A SENSE OF URGENCY.
AND I JUST, IDEALLY WE WOULD JUST BE BACK HERE ASKING FOR A CERTIFICATE OF REMEDIATION TO RESTORE THE FACADE, WHICH THEY'RE RESTORING THE FACADE.
I'M CONCERNED BY THIS AND MAYBE IT'S A LEGAL DEFINITION, BUT I MEAN THE OBSTRUCTION OF ALTERATIONS TO ME IS VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE BUILDING ITSELF.
WE'RE NOT PUNCHING A WINDOW WHERE THERE WAS NOT ONE, WE'RE NOT ADDING AN ADDITION TO THE BACK.
THIS IS THE ORIGINAL HISTORIC FABRIC OF THE BUILDING ITSELF.
TO ME THAT IS CLEARLY DEMOLITION VERSUS AN ALTERATION THAT IS OBSTRUCTED FROM THE FRONT FACADE.
PLUS THEY WEREN'T GONNA STOP UNTIL PEOPLE STARTED CALLING AND STUFF.
SO THEY'VE SHOWN THEMSELVES TO NOT BE GREAT, GREAT STEWARDS OF THIS BUILDING AT THIS MOMENT.
SO I JUST WONDER WHY WE'RE MAKING IT EASY FOR THEM WHEN THEY'VE DONE THINGS THAT, THAT GO AGAINST THE RULES OF.
BUT RIGHT NOW WE HAVE, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE AN APPLICATION, WE HAVE A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE A PERMIT, WE C OF A APPLICATION FEE PAID.
WE HAVE A PERSON WHO IS GONNA GET, GO THROUGH BUILDING PERMITTING.
THEY'LL HAVE INSPECTIONS ON THAT FRAMING.
AND, AND ALL OF THAT WORK WILL BE DONE BY THE HISTORIC INSPECTOR OR HIS TEAM OF, SO AGAIN, IT'S A QUESTION OF EFFICIENCY OF OF WELL I THINK WE COULD INSTRUCT THEM, COULD STABILIZE THE BUILDING UNTIL WE GET ADEQUATE INFORMATION ABOUT THE EXISTING STATE.
THEY CAN PUT TEMPORARY SHORING UP TO KEEP IT FROM FALLING DOWN, PUT A TARP OVER IT.
I MEAN, THERE'S PLENTY OF THINGS THEY CAN DO THAT DON'T COST THAT MUCH MONEY TO KEEP THE BUILDING FROM FALLING DOWN WHILE WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON.
AND, AND I THINK, UH, I CERTAINLY AGREE WITH THE DEFERRAL.
I WILL SECOND IT ACTUALLY BECAUSE I FEEL THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF INFORMATION MISSING FOR ME TO MAKE ANY DECISION HERE RIGHT NOW.
CAN CAN I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT EXISTING CONDITIONS, I DON'T, I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE EVERYTHING THAT I NEED TO TAKE TO THIS OWNER THAT YOU GUYS WANNA SEE.
AND RIGHT NOW I KNOW YOU WANNA SEE THE EXISTING FLOOR PLAN.
SO, UM, THE PRE THE PRE THE PRE DEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN, UH, THE DEMOLITION FLOOR PLAN, OKAY.
PREVIOUS, RIGHT? SO WE HAD THE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS SAW THE BACK WALL HAS NOT BEEN MOD, I MEAN THEY'RE NOT ADDING SQUARE FOOTAGE BASED ON WHAT WE SAW FROM GOOGLE EARTH.
UM, SO, UM, TERRANCE, I THINK WE WANT AN EXISTING FLOOR LAND, RIGHT? BUT TERRANCE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE.
THINK THAT'S, THINK THAT'S A QUESTION WE'RE ASKING AND THERE'S SOME OKAY.
IT THAT MAY BE, AND THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'RE, WE, WE ARE, WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHETHER COULDN'T, CAN'T WE JUST MAKE THAT A CONDITION? I MEAN IF WE'RE TREATING IT LIKE A COR, WE'RE JUST GONNA, WE CAN JUST SAY THEY CAN'T EXCEED THE, THE THE WHAT WAS THERE.
I MEAN, WHY I DON'T THINK THINK IT'S FUNDAMENTALLY GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING WAITING ANOTHER MONTH TO LOOK AT AN EXISTING FLOOR PLAN.
IF, IF, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT IT AS AN ILLEGAL DEMOLITION, ALL WE'RE GOING TO TELL THEM IS THEY HAVE TO, TO PUT IT
[02:00:01]
BACK TO THAT FLOOR PLAN.WE CAN'T TELL THEM THEY CAN, THE, THE, THE ENVELOPE, IF YOU KNOW WHAT WAS THERE, THEN THAT'S THE SOLUTION.
THEY HAVE TO PUT THAT BACK THERE.
AND THEN THERE'S SOME RESTRICTIONS OR WE CAN JUST SIMPLY APPROVE IT AS A COR AND HAVE THEM NOT EXCEED THAT FOOTPRINT OF THE WHATEVER WAS EXISTING, WHICH APPEARS FROM THE GOOGLE IMAGE TO BE EXTREMELY SIMILAR TO THIS.
I'M NOT SEEING THAT THERE'S A REAL BIG VARIATION IN THAT STEP.
I FEEL LIKE HOLDING UP TWO MONTHS VERIFY THAT FOR, FOR US TO LOOK AT A DRAWING AND BE LIKE, WELL WE JUST WANT THAT WHEN WE CAN JUST SAY WE WANT THAT TODAY.
AND MAYBE THAT GETS IT GOING AND GETS THE BUILDING SAVED.
'CAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IF THE WALL FALLS, YOU KNOW, JANUARY 1ST AND WE DON'T MEET AND THEN WE'VE LOST THE WHOLE BUILDING.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN, I WOULD, I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO MAKE EMOTIONAL ALONG THOSE LINES OF JUST, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN BUILD BACK WHAT WAS THERE.
I MEAN, WE HAVE PICTURES OF THE ELEVATIONS, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S HOW I WOULD APPROACH IT.
COMMISSIONER, IF I MAY ASK COMMISSIONER COUCH, WOULD YOU ALLOW THAT MOTION TO TEST WHO SECONDED MY MOTION? NO ONE.
SO THAT'S WHY I'M COMING BACK TO YOU.
NO, NO, IT WAS, IT WAS SECOND.
I, I WANNA CONFER WITH THE SECONDER.
WOULD, WOULD YOU BE OKAY WITH ME RESCINDING IT? WELL, I, I, SO BEFORE DOING THAT, I WOULD, I, I HAVE A, I HAVE QUESTIONS.
SO IF I GO BACK TO THE ORIGIN, UH, PAGE 10 OF 16.
I, IS THAT THE PIC? YES, THAT'S THE PICTURE NEWS PLAN? YEP.
SO THE PROPOSED, RIGHT NOW I PRESUME THE ROOF PLAN AND THE PROPOSED WALLS RIGHT NOW ARE PRETTY CLOSE, RIGHT? SO MY ISSUE IS THAT, WAS THAT HOW THE ORIGINAL BUILDING LOOK, THAT THERE WAS ACTUALLY LIKE FOUR STEPS KIND OF THING? CAN YOU JUST LOOK GOOGLE, THERE'S A GOOGLE, THERE'S A, THERE'S A GOOGLE, THERE'S A GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE SIDE BY SIDE.
IF YOU COULD PUT THE GOOGLE EARTH IMAGE, THEN WE ALL NEED TO TURN TO PAGE 10.
WHAT? 10 DOCUMENT IN OUR PACKETS, PLEASE.
OH, YOU GONNA PULL IT UP HERE? OH, THERE WE GO.
OH, AND WHILE THEY GET THE PRESENTATION TOGETHER, THERE WAS A CONCERN BY THE, BY THE SPEAKER ABOUT THE AWNINGS.
I WANNA MAKE SURE I, UH, UH, I ADDRESS THAT.
SO I SPOKE WITH THE AGENT AND THE AGENT AGREED THAT WE WOULD POSTPONE THE AWNINGS UNTIL STAFF COULD REVIEW THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT SHOWN AN ELEVATION.
UM, SO I KNOW THAT, THAT THAT WAS A CONCERN.
SO THEY'RE GOING TO BRING THAT BACK WITH THE AWNINGS AND THE SIGNAGE AT THE SAME TIME ON ANOTHER SEPARATE COA.
SO I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT'S ADDRESSED.
WHAT I'M HEARING IS THE, THE, THE, THE CONTRARY MOTION WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BUILD BACK TO THE SAME EXTENT THAT IT EXISTED BEFORE, WHICH WOULD AT LEAST REMEDY AN ASPECT OF THE DEMOLITION ASPECT AND, AND THAT THE AWNING WOULD BE THEN DETERMINED BY STAFF AT A LATER DATE.
THEY, THEY WOULD, IT WOULD NOT COME BACK TO US, BUT THEY WOULD, THEY WOULD ENSURE THAT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE, WHICH WAS THE CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
SO IN THAT REGARD, WOULD YOU ENTERTAIN, RE REMOVING YOUR SECOND ALLOWING, YEAH.
SO R RIGHT NOW THEY'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS MY QUESTION.
SO I SEE FOUR STEPS, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ACTUALLY ON THE PROPOSED.
DO WE FEEL THAT THAT IS EXACTLY HOW IT LOOKED LIKE? I, I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS.
I THINK THE MOTION IS THEY, THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED TO PUT BACK WHAT THEY HAD.
BUT, BUT AREN'T YOU CONTRADICTING YOURSELF? YOU DO YOU SAY PUT BACK WHAT THEY HAD? THAT'S WHAT I WANT.
THAT THEY PUT BACK WHAT THEY HAD NOT COME UP CREATIVELY AND DO SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IF I WANT TO BE STRICT ABOUT IT.
SO I WANT KNOW, THEREFORE WHAT WAS THERE, SO THEN THEY PUT IT BACK.
WHAT WAS THERE? I, I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK THIS CONDITION WOULD, WOULD, STAFF WOULD VERIFY THAT THEY'D HAVE TO GET ON THE PROPERTY.
BUT I MEAN, THE FOUNDATION IS STILL INTACT.
THE FLOOR PLATE WHERE THE WALL IS, IS STILL KNOWABLE BECAUSE THEY TOOK THE WALL DOWN.
SO I, I DO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER COSGROVE THAT WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO SEE A DRAWING FOR THAT REAR AREA.
IF IT DOES MATCH WHAT IT WAS, AND IF WE CAN'T SEE IT, THEN WE, THEN WE WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BUILD THAT WALL BACK AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT EITHER.
I MEAN, YOUR ANSWER IS SATISFACTORY TO ME.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THEY BUILD BACK BEFORE, NOT BUILD BACK BETTER.
SO I HAVE A NEW, I HAVE A NEW MOTION
[02:05:01]
TO THE EXISTING VERSUS THE PROPOSED THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE.ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT JUST THE CONCRETE BLOCK SECTION? I I'M JUST TALKING ABOUT, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY WE KNOW THAT THE FRONT BRICK OR BLOCK SECTION IS INTACT, BUT THE PORTION BEHIND IT IS DIFFERENT IN THE EXISTING THAN IT IS IN THE PROPOSED.
ARE WE WILLING TO BUT IT ALL, IT ALL STEPS BACK AND IS NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE WE'RE, WE'RE IN AGREEANCE THAT, THAT, THAT THIS, THIS MOTION THE PROPOSED YEAH, THIS MOTION WOULD ALLOW THAT TO BE REBUILT AS, AS THEY SEE FIT.
AS LONG AS IT OCCURS WHERE IT OCCURRED.
THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION.
AND THEN THAT'S, THAT'S HOW, AND THEN STAFF WILL HELP DETERMINE WHERE, WHAT, WHAT IT WAS.
AND THEY'LL ALSO DETERMINE, ENSURE THAT THE AWNING IS APPROPRIATE MATERIALS.
NO, I THINK THE AWNING'S GONNA COME BACK AS A SEPARATE SEA OF A, THE AWNINGS COMING BACK.
YEAH, I WAS JUST GONNA, BEFORE THE, BEFORE YOU SAID THAT ABOUT THE AWNING.
I WAS JUST GONNA REITERATE WHAT WAS JUST SAID.
IS THAT, AND WE'RE AGREEING THAT, UH, THAT SECTION JUST DISCUSSED, UH, BEYOND THE CMU WALL ISN'T VISIBLE FROM THE STREET, OR I GUESS I WOULD SAY THEREFORE THE UNDERSTANDING IS IT'S NOT VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
IT'S IN THAT SAW TOOTH STEP BACK THAT, UH, COMMISSIONER YEAH.
AND, AND THEN YES, THE, AND IF WE HEARD THAT THE CANVAS AWNINGS A IS A SEPARATE, UH, SUBMITTAL FOR COA.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE SAY NO.
ALL OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS THAT PASSES? THANK YOU.
CAN YOU REPEAT THE MOTION? UM, THE MOTION WAS TO, WELL THE MOTION IS BASICALLY, UH, WHAT STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED WITH THE EXCEPTION THAT, UM, ONE, THE TRANS THE, THE AWNING WILL BE BROUGHT BACK FOR ANOTHER REVIEW ONCE IT'S DETERMINED AND DESIGNED.
AND THAT BUILDING BACK THE WALL, THE PERIMETER WALLS THAT WERE TAKEN DOWN WILL, WILL BE PUT BACK WHERE THEY WERE PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION.
SO THEREFORE THE, THE, THE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE WILL NOT INCREASE WHEN BUILDING BACK.
THERE WILL BE NO CHANGE IN SQUARE FOOTAGE TO THE BUILDING.
THAT, THAT IS THE, THAT'S THE NUANCE OF THE, AND IT WAS COSGROVE AND MCNEIL.
YEAH, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE STILL, YOU KNOW.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE HHC.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON TERRANCE JACKSON.
AND TODAY I SUBMIT TO YOU ITEM A 15 AT 2023 ARLINGTON STREET, A CONTRIBUTING HOME HOLD ON A CON, A LANDMARK LOCATED IN THE HOUSTON HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT INCLUDES A, THE PROPERTY INCLUDES A 3,263 SQUARE FOOT, TWO STORY SINGLE FRAME RESIDENCE WITH A TWO STORY DETACHED GARAGE.
THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED ON A 19,800 SQUARE FOOT INTERIOR LOT.
THE ANSON M ALLACH HOUSE IS A BUNGALOW STYLE HOME BUILT IN CIRCA 1912 AND A GARAGE WHICH WAS BUILT IN CIRCA 1940, BUT IS NOT LISTED WITHIN THE LANDMARK REPORT OR APPLICATIONS.
IT WAS INDIVIDUALLY LI THE HOME WAS INDIVIDUALLY LISTED ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES AS OF JUNE OF 1983.
AND, AND IN ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCT AND, AND AN ADDITION WAS CONSTRUCTED ON THE EXISTING HOME.
IN 2012, THE APPLICANT PROPOSES TO PROPOSES THE DEMOLITION OF AN, OF AN EXISTING 924 SQUARE FOOT GARAGE AND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT TO MAKE ROOM FOR A NEW AND LARGER 1,392 SQUARE FOOT GARAGE AND ACCESS ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT.
THE DESIGN INCLUDES A COVERED PATIO CONNECTING THE NEW STRUCTURE TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCE.
THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE SITE WILL BE REMOVED WITH PRIMARY VEHICLE ACCESS TO THE NEW GARAGE RELOCATED TO THE ALLEY.
THE PROPOSED RIDGE HEIGHT OF THE GARAGE IS 30 FEET FOR FOUR INCHES.
UH, IT IS TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING AND CEMENT
[02:10:01]
CEMENTATION SIDING ON THE GARAGE, WHICH WILL MATCH THE REVEAL PATTERN OF THE EXISTING CONTRIBUTING LANDMARK SEMEN.TISSUE SIDING WILL ALSO BE ON BE ON THE SKIRTING TO MATCH THE APPEARANCE OF THE HOME.
THE PROPOSED ROOF OF THE GARAGE WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH COMPOSITE SHINGLES AND A SEVEN OVER 12 ROOF PITCH.
THE PROPOSED ROOF OF THE PATIO WILL BE A STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF.
STAFF MET WITH THE DESIGN TEAM IN NOVEMBER TO SUGGEST THE NECESSARY CHANGES, WHICH WOULD NEED TO BE APPLIED TO THE DESIGN IN ORDER TO GET A RECOMMENDATION OF FR APPROVAL.
THOSE MAJOR SUGGESTIONS WERE, ONE, REMOVE THE SKIRTING FROM THE PORCH AND GARAGE DESIGN.
TWO, DO NOT CONNECT THE PORCH TO THE EXISTING HOME.
AND THREE, BRING THE RIDGE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE DOWN BELOW 30 FEET.
AFTER CONVERSATION WITH THE OWNER, THE AGENTS RESPONDED WITH THE OPTION TO UTILIZE THE 90 DAY WAIVER.
THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS A DENIAL OF THE COA.
THE PROJECT DOES NOT SATISFY THE CR CRITERIA FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
UH, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE HHC, THE AGENT AND OWNERS ARE NOT HERE.
UM, BUT I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DOING SO, BUT THERE, THERE'S NO ONE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THIS.
SO I WILL, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE IF YOU, IF YOU WANNA WALK THROUGH THOSE DOORS RIGHT NOW.
SO, UM, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
TERRANCE, I HAVE A REALLY PICKY QUESTION, UM, ABOUT THE SKIRTING ON THE ORIGINAL HOUSE IN THE INVENTORY PHOTO.
I MEAN, THERE'S A BRICK SKIRT, UM, IN THE CURRENT HAR PHOTO.
THE SKIRT HAS BEEN EXTENDED DOWN, CERTAINLY MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE PERIOD OF THE HOUSE.
BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF WE KNOW IF THERE'S, HAS THERE BEEN A COA FOR THIS TO RESTORE THAT SKIRTING AT SOME POINT? UM, I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT HAPPENED WHEN THEY DID THE ADDITION IN 2012.
I MEAN, DON'T Y'ALL THINK THE SKIRTING WAS ORIGINAL? YEAH.
VERSUS, BUT ISN'T IT A MOOT POINT? 'CAUSE THEY HAVE A 90 DAY WAIVER.
I'M JUST ASKING FOR THE SAKE OF ASKING
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO ACCEPT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.
ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THANK YOU, TERRANCE.
WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM B AT PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF GLENBROOK VALLEY WINDOW DATA FROM 2018 TO 2024.
GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION.
THIS IS STAFF PERSON SAMANTHA DELEON.
I SUBMIT TO YOU ITEM B, THE GLENBROOK VALLEY WINDOW DATA SUMMARIZATION FROM 2018 TO 2024.
SO THIS PRESENTATION WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, AN OVERVIEW OF THE DATA SET THAT STAFF USE TO CREATE THIS PRESENTATION WINDOW DATA BY THE NUMBERS, TRENDS IN WINDOW, CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS OVER TIME, ANALYSIS OVER TYPES OF WINDOWS, APPROVAL, DENIAL AND CONTRIBUTION STATUS, AS WELL AS INSIGHT FROM THE DATA.
SO THE WAY THAT STAFF WAS ABLE TO, UH, PUT ALL OF THIS INFORMATION TOGETHER WAS USING HISTORIC PRESERVATION TRACKER.
AND THE DATES IN QUESTION THAT ARE BEING STUDIED ARE FROM 2018 TO 20 24, 20 18 WAS USED BECAUSE THAT IS AS FAR BACK AS PRESERVATION TRACKER GOES.
SO FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, THAT IS WHAT STAFF USED.
AND A LOT OF METTA, A LOT OF METADATA WAS INCLUDED IN THE PRESENTATION OR IN THE DATASET, INCLUDING APPLICATION NUMBER YEARS, ADDRESSES, SUBTYPES, ANY TYPE OF INFORMATION THAT WAS PUT IN PRESERVATION TRACKER WAS PUT INTO OUR DATA SET.
AND THE PRIMARY FOCUS WAS TO ANALYZE WINDOW RELATED APPLICATIONS.
AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS IS JUST A PICTURE OF WHAT THE DATA SET LOOKED LIKE, JUST PURELY, PURELY FOR, UH, FOR EXAMPLES, FOR EXAMPLE, REASONS.
SO THE FIRST THING THAT STAFF LOOKED AT WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COA APPLICATIONS, WHICH WAS 132.
OUT OF THOSE 132 APPLICATIONS, 76 OF THOSE WERE FOR WINDOWS.
ALSO, LOOKING AT, UH, THIS OUT OF THE 76 WINDOW APPLICATIONS, WE WANTED TO LOOK AT CONTRIBUTION STATUS.
SO 45 OF THOSE WINDOW APPLICATIONS WERE FOR CONTRIBUTING, UH, FOR CONTRIBUTING PROPERTIES.
SO THAT IS 58% OF ALL WINDOW APPLICATIONS
[02:15:01]
WERE FOR, OR 58% OF ALL COAS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY WERE WINDOW APPLICATIONS.AND 59% OF THOSE WINDOW APPLICATIONS WERE FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
STAFF ALSO DECIDED TO LOOK AT THIS OVER TIME.
AND I OR AND STAFF PUT TOGETHER THIS GRAPH TO KIND OF SHOW WINDOW APPLICATIONS BY YEAR.
THIS SHOWS, UH, ALL OF THE WINDOW APPLICATIONS IN THE ORANGE LINE.
ANY OTHER APPLICATION THAT, UH, THAT DID NOT HAVE TO DO WITH WINDOWS WAS, UH, MARKED AS OTHER AND IS SHOWN IN BLUE.
SO AS WE CAN SEE, THE PEAK FOR APPLICATIONS WAS IN 2021.
WE ALSO LOOKED AT CONTRIBUTION STATUS OVER TIME, AND WHAT WE SAW WAS THAT MORE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES APPLIED FOR WINDOW COAS THAN NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, AGAIN, WITH THE PEAK BEING IN 2021.
STAFF ALSO ADDITIONALLY LOOKED AT PAST AND CURRENT ACTIONS OF ALL OF THE WINDOW APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED IN GLENBROOK VALLEY.
WE FOUND THAT THERE WAS 21 APPROVED, TWO APPROVED, UH, PARTIALLY NINE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS.
WE HAD TWO APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEWS FROM 2018 TO NOW 30 DENIED.
11 WERE WITHDRAWN AND ONE IS CURRENTLY IN REVIEW.
AS WE HEARD EARLIER TODAY, STAFF ALSO WENT AHEAD AND ANALYZED THE TYPE OF WINDOW APPLICATIONS THAT WERE APPROVED AS WELL AS DENIED.
THIS IS A KIND OF A ALL ENCOMPASSING GRAPH THAT INCLUDES THAT INFORMATION.
AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THE, UH, IT IS DIVIDED UP BY APPROVED AND DENIAL.
SO AS WE CAN SEE HERE, 11 MOST, THE MOST APPROVED CATEGORY OF APPROVED WINDOW TYPES IN GLENBROOK VALLEY WERE ALUMINUM TO ALUMINUM WITH 11 OF THEM BEING APPROVED.
THE SECOND MOST WAS ALUMINUM TO VINYL.
ADDITIONALLY, FOR, UH, THE DENIALS, WE SAW THAT THEY, THERE WERE OVER 30 OR THERE WERE 30 DENIALS OF WINDOW APPLICATIONS AND 20 OF THEM WERE FOR ALUMINUM TO VINYL.
SO IT SEEMS THAT, UH, APPLICANTS ARE STILL APPLYING FOR, UH, ALUMINUM TO VINYL WINDOW APPLICATIONS DESPITE THE, UH, NUMBERS OF DENIALS, WHICH IS 20.
SO THAT 66% OF DENIALS IS FOR ALUMINUM TO FINAL.
IN ADDITION TO LOOKING AT THE DENIALS, STAFF WANTED TO ALSO LOOK AT THE COORS.
AND SO OUT OF ALL OF THE, UH, WINDOW APPLICATIONS IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, ONLY 22 HAD COORS.
WE ALSO DECIDED TO LOOK AT THOSE FROM DENIALS AND FROM 30 DENIALS, 22 HAD COORS, SO THAT WAS 73%.
SO AS WE CAN SEE, A LOT OF THE DENIALS THAT DO COME IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION ARE FOR WORK DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT.
ADDITIONALLY, THIS GRAPH ALSO SHOWS, UH, THE TYPE OF WINDOWS APPLICATIONS THAT WERE DENIED THAT WENT TO APPEALS OUT OF 30 DENIALS, 10 WENT TO, UH, APPEALS EIGHT WERE REVERSED INTO WERE UPHELD.
SO AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE GRAPH SHOWN, UH, THIS, UH, DEMONSTRATES THE TYPE OF WINDOWS THAT WENT TO APPEALS AS WELL AS THE YEAR THAT IT WENT.
SO THERE WERE NO APPEALS FOR WINDOW APPLICATIONS IN 2023.
AND JUST THIS YEAR ALONE, WE HAVE HAD THREE REVERSALS IN ONE UPHELD.
OVERALL, WE HAD 132 APPLICATIONS.
76 OF THOSE WERE WINDOW APPLICATIONS, 30 DENIALS, 10 WENT TO APPEALS, TWO OVERTURNED OR EIGHT OVERTURNED, AND TWO AFFIRMED 21 WERE APPROVED.
11 WITHDRAWN, NINE APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS, TWO APPROVED PARTIALLY, AGAIN, TWO COMPLETED APPLICA, UH, PRE-APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEWS AND ONE IN REVIEW.
IN CONCLUSION, BASED ON THE DATA, APPEALS ARE MOSTLY REVERSED AT 80%.
MOST COAS, MOST WINDOW COAS ARE DENIED.
MOST WINDOW COAS ARE FOR ALUMINUM TO VINYL WINDOWS AND THERE IS A HIGHER APPROVAL RATES FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS.
THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
I AM ALSO AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
SO AT THE MOMENT IT IS UNKNOWN.
MR. YAP, UH, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WHERE YOU WERE TRYING TO FACTOR
[02:20:01]
IN THE COORS WITH THE COAS? OKAY, SO OUT OF THE 76 WINDOWS COR 20, YOU ARE SAYING 30% OF THAT WAS ACTUALLY C-O-C-O-R TO BEGIN WITH, AND THEN THEY THEN WENT TO A COA, AM I RIGHT? CAN YOU REPEAT THAT? SO YOU SAID THERE WAS 76 WINDOW COA, BUT OUT OF THE 76 WINDOW, 30, ALMOST 30% ORIGINATED FROM A COR FIRST.THAT MEANS THERE WERE 30% OF THEM DID NOT HAVE ANY PERMITS.
THANK YOU FOR THE CONFIRMATION.
BUT SAM, A C OF R IS STILL C OF R AND NOT A C OF A.
SO THE COR IS FOR, I INCLUDED THE COR IF IT WAS INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION.
SO USUALLY WHEN WORK IS DONE WITHOUT A PERMIT, STAFF DOES DENIAL AND ISSUANCE OF A COR.
SO I WENT THROUGH ALL OF, OR STAFF WENT THROUGH ALL OF THE DENIAL, COA APPLICATIONS, AND ANYONE THAT SAID ISSUANCE OF COR WAS INCLUDED IN THIS GRAPH.
YEAH, BUT THE COR, BUT THE COA THAT CAME LATER BECAUSE THEY HAD A COR AND THEN THEY HAD A COA TO DO WHATEVER THEY NEEDED TO REMEDY IT.
SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU HAVE NINE, UH, 76 PLUS 30% MORE.
YEAH, IT'S 76 TOTAL WINDOW APPLICATIONS.
AND OUT OF THAT 76, 22 OF THEM HAD COORS.
I, I'M SORRY IF THAT WAS CONFUSING, SAM, YOU MAY HAVE HAD A GRAPH AS WELL, BUT OF THE, OF THESE, HOW MUCH OF THESE WERE CONTRIBUTING VERSUS NOT CONTRIBUTING FOR THE COORS? SO THAT IS ACTUALLY INCLUDED IN THE MAP PACKET THAT ALL OF YOU HAD.
AND IF YOU GO AHEAD AND LOOK AT THE THIRD GRAPH, ALL OF THE, UH, DOTTED DOTS ON THE MAP INDICATE COORS AND THE COLOR BEHIND THEM INDICATES WHETHER OR NOT IF THEY WERE CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING.
I DO NOT HAVE THE PARTICULAR NUMBER ON ME AT THE MOMENT.
UM, LET ME ASK, WILL, LET ME ASK THE QUESTION ANOTHER WAY.
YOU, YOU MENTIONED THE, UM, 80% OF THESE REVERSED BY APPEAL, BUT OF THOSE 80%, HOW MUCH OF THOSE WERE C OF R VERSUS CONTRIBUTING? I MEAN, SORRY, NOT CONTRIBUTING VERSUS CONTRIBUTING THAT INFORMATION I DO NOT HAVE.
YEAH, BUT I THINK THAT'S, IT'D BE GOOD TO DRILL DOWN ON THAT AS WELL, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S ANOTHER FACTOR IN, IN, IN THAT EVALUATION.
BUT IT'S, IT'S SORT OF EXPLAINED IN FIGURE TWO.
'CAUSE FIGURE TWO IS APPEALED WINDOW CO A IS AN OVERTURN STATUS AND IT SHOWS THAT I'M CONTRIBUTING NON-CONTRIBUTING MAP.
SO WERE YOU GONNA PRESENT THIS INFORMATION AS WELL? I INCLUDED ALL OF IT, UH, IN PRINTED FORM AS WELL AS IN THE, UH, THE IPADS JUST BECAUSE OF HOW BIG THE MAP IS, IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SHOW ON THE PRESENTATION.
BUT I DID WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT, UH, ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS DID HAVE THOSE MAPS.
SO IF YOU DO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I CAN DEFINITELY ANSWER THEM AS WELL.
WELL, THE BLUE IS THE REVERSE.
YEAH, I JUST WISH YOU COULD PUT THAT, WE COULD PUT THAT UP IN THE DOCUMENT, MR. JONES, AND MAYBE GO THROUGH THAT CAMERA PLEASE.
IT, IT'S NOT AS CLEAR TO ME WHEN I LOOKED AT THE MAPS.
UM, CAN WE PUT THE MAP ON THE PROJECTOR? YES.
OH, SO IT LOOKS LIKE WE WERE A 50 50 SPLIT FOR UPHELD BY APPEALS BOARD.
IT WAS 50 50 FOR CONTRIBUTING, BOTH NON-CONTRIBUTING, CONTRIBUTING 50 50 FOR BEING UPHELD.
SO WHICH IS THE, WHICH IS THE CONTRIBU, THE GREEN IS CONTRIBUTING.
YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE BACKGROUND COLOR.
I'M COLOR BLIND, SO THEY ALL SAME TO ME.
THIS IS REALLY HELPFUL TO GIVE US A, A PICTURE OF KIND OF WHAT I THOUGHT.
WE FEEL LIKE WE'VE BEEN ALL OVER THE BOARD ON THIS, THIS WHOLE THING.
THANK YOU FOR PULLING THIS TOGETHER.
OF COURSE, THERE'S AN ORANGE COLOR, YOU CAN'T SEE THE ORANGE COLOR.
THIS SEEMS TO ME LIKE THIS IS A GREAT BASIS NOW, BUT THIS SEEMS TO ME LIKE THIS IS A GREAT BASIS NOW FOR US TO HAVE THE CONVERSATION THAT WE TALKED ABOUT COMING OUT OF CAMP, WHERE WE SIT DOWN AND TRY
[02:25:01]
AND SET SOME POLICIES OR, OR PARAMETERS AROUND WHAT OUR, YOU KNOW, WHAT THIS COMMISSION, THE MAKEUP OF THIS COMMISSION FEELS SHOULD BE THE, THE GUIDELINES BY WHICH WE DETERMINE WINDOWS IN GLEN, BUT VALLEY.BUT BEYOND SAM, I THINK YOU ALSO HAD THE NEXT STEP, I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE THE NEXT PART OF THE NEXT PART OF YOUR RESEARCH WAS GOING TO, UM, SURVEY WHAT OTHER CITIES AND, UH, TO GIVE US AN IN INDICATING INDICATION OF, YOU KNOW, HOW OTHER CITIES ARE APPROACHING THIS.
UH, ALSO I WAS TOLD THAT BOOT CHECK WOULD REALLY LIKE TO HAVE A MEETING WITH ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS AS WELL AS HPAB MEMBERS TO DISCUSS WINDOWS.
SO WE ARE LOOKING INTO POSSIBLY FIVE DATES BETWEEN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY.
WE'LL SEND OUT A POLL AND WE'LL ALSO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE, YOU KNOW, POST THAT IT IS A PUBLIC MEETING SINCE, YOU KNOW, THERE WILL BE MORE THAN ENOUGH COMMISSIONERS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT PUBLIC NOTICE HAS TO BE GIVEN.
AND, UH, I WILL HAVE MORE OF THAT INFORMATION HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT COMING WEEKS.
BECAUSE WE DID EN CAMP IN JULY, WE DID HAVE THREE PRESENTERS PRESENTING MULTIPLE REGIONS OF AMERICA AND HOW THEY APPROACH, UH, WINDOWS LIKE FOR INSTANCE AND OTHER THINGS AS WELL.
SO, SO WE, WE DO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF THAT KNOWLEDGE.
UM, WHAT WE HAVEN'T HAD THE BENEFIT IS TO, IS TO DISCUSS AMONGST OURSELVES AND WITH THE, WITH THE APPEALS BOARD, THE ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE, THE, THE WRITTEN WORD THAT WE HAVE AND, AND TO REVIEW, UM, REVIEW THAT ALONG WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US.
AND AND TO DO THAT WOULD BE A POSTED MEETING, LIKELY NOT AT THIS SCHEDULED MEETING, BUT WHETHER IT IS, WHETHER IT'S, UM, DURING A WEEKDAY OR WHETHER IT'S A SATURDAY MORNING THAT'S, I GUESS UP TO STAFF TO DETERMINE AND, AND WHEN YOU PUT THE POLL OUT THAT YOU MENTIONED.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IN THE PAST YEARS, UM, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S BEEN A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE BODY THAT DOES APPEALS, WHICH WHEN WE BEGAN THIS, OUR JOURNEY, UH, JOHN AND I, IT WAS THE APPEALS, IT WAS THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
AND SO, UM, AND WHAT HELPED US, UM, WAS HAVING SOME MEETINGS BETWEEN BOTH GROUPS AND TALKING THROUGH ISSUES, MANY, MANY ISSUES BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, UM, IT'S THE CONSENSUS OF THIS BODY TO DETERMINE, UM, WHAT IS RECOMMENDED.
AND IF THERE ARE CHANGES IN THOSE, IN THE CONSENSUS, THEN THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN CODIFIED IN REVISIONS TO LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, MY CONCERN IS, I KNOW ONE OF THE A A PROJECT I NOT CONTRIBUTING PROJECT WAS OVERTURNED, UH, JUST RECENTLY.
UM, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, UM, THE, THE CORE OF THIS ISSUE, AND I MAY AS ROMAN IN ONE MOMENT, BUT, UM, IS PER YOUR GRAPH, THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE FACE IS THIS CATEGORY OF ALUMINUM TO VINYL.
IT HAS TO DO WITH THE ORDINANCE AND THE LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE, WHICH ESTABLISHES WHETHER YOU CAN CHANGE WINDOWS MODE.
UM, IN THE CASE OF NOT, OF NOT CONTRIBUTING, YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR WINDOWS.
IN THE CASE OF CONTRIBUTING, YOU HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THEY'RE NOT REPAIRABLE IN A, IN A REASONABLE WAY.
AND IF SO, UM, THE ORDINANCE DOES ADDRESS WHAT THAT CHANGES WOULD BE.
UM, IN THE LAST MEETING AS WE WERE DISCUSSING ANOTHER WINDOW PROJECT, UM, WE READ THAT TEXT.
I MIGHT ASK THAT WE READ IT AGAIN, BECAUSE THAT'S THE CRUX OF MUCH OF THESE GRAPHS.
AND IT SEEMS TO ME WHAT I STATED WAS, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU, WHILE IF YOU'RE NOT CONTRIBUTING, YOU CAN CHANGE YOUR WINDOW, BUT IT NEEDS TO MATCH, UH, THE TYPE OF WINDOW THAT WAS IN THE AREA IN, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IN THE PEER SIGNIFICANCE.
AND IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, THERE WAS ONLY ONE TYPE OF WINDOW, AT LEAST MATERIAL THAT WAS ALUMINUM.
UH, THERE ARE PROVISIONS IN THE HOUSTON, IN, IN LIKE IN OUR ORDINANCE THAT IF YOU ARE ALLOWED TO REPLACE A WINDOW, UM, YOU ARE GIVEN SOME DEFERENCE, BUT IT HAS TO LOOK LIKE THE WINDOW, IN THIS CASE ALUMINUM.
IT HAS TO HAVE PROPORTIONS, LIGHT PATTERNS AND, AND OTHER ASPECTS.
UM, SO TO ME THAT'S THE ISSUE.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS A REQUEST WAS MADE FROM THE APPEALS BOARD, UM, IS TO ASK FOR THE CONSENSUS OF THIS BODY ON THAT, ON THAT, ON WHAT I'VE STATED, THAT ALUMINUM IS, FOR INSTANCE, IN GLENBROOK VALLEY, SINCE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TODAY, IF A WINDOW IS REPLACED TO MEET THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN, THE APPLICATION WOULD NEED TO BE ALUMINUM.
SO AGAIN, THAT WAS THEY, THE APPEALS BOARD SAID IT WOULD HELP THEM IF WE MADE THE DETERMINATION AND PUT IT IN WRITING ON THE WEBSITE FOR ALL THE PUBLIC TO SEE.
[02:30:01]
SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT, UM, THAT WE MAY WANNA HAVE DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT AT THIS.THEY, THEY OVERTURNED THIS WITH A VERY DIFFERENT SET OF, UM, WELL, I'M NOT SURE WHAT, WHAT THE BASIS THAT THEY USED, BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCE AND THE, THE LANGUAGE OF THE ORDINANCE.
AND, BUT THEY DID SAY THAT IF WE WOULD, IF THAT, IF WE MADE THAT DETERMINATION AND PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE, THAT WOULD AID THEM IN THE FUTURE.
SO I'M PUTTING, I'M JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
I THINK AT THE RISK OF GETTING TO, AND THIS IS, THIS IS THE CONVERSATION TO HAVE IN OUR KIND OF WORKING SESSION OR WHAT I ENVISION AS OUR WORKING SESSION.
DO WE WANT TO GET, OR YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO GET DOWN TO, UH, THE DEFINITIONS OF MATERIALS OR ARE WE AS A BODY GOING TO COMMIT TO INTERPRET THE ORDINANCE AS WE WILL, WE WILL WORK TO MAINTAIN AND PROTECT ANY AND ALL ORIGINAL HISTORIC MATERIAL.
YOU KNOW, I MEAN SOME, A LOT OF THIS STUFF FALLS UNDER THAT.
AND IF WE HAVE THAT AS AN UMBRELLA, THEN WE CAN, WE CAN REFER.
IF WE HAVE THAT AND WE ALL AGREE TO THAT, THEN WE REFER TO THAT AND SAY, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, THESE CAN BE REPAIRED OR THERE ARE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO REPLACING.
I, I UNDERSTAND, I UNDERSTAND IN ANY DISTRICT UNDERSTAND.
BUT THE CAVEAT, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED ON THE GRAPHS, AND I, I COULDN'T QUITE PARSE THE PLAN.
IT DEPENDS ON WHETHER IT'S CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING BASED ON THE ORDINANCE AND THE LANGUAGE WE HAVE.
SO THAT, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT DOES DEPEND.
THERE'S A DISTINCTION OF COURSE, BETWEEN WHAT'S CONTRIBUTING AND NON-CONTRIBUTING.
BUT TO THE ISSUE, THE WAY IT READS IN BLACK AND WHITE, TO ME, THE SAME CRITERIA OR, OR VERY SIMILAR CRITERIA APPLY IN TERMS OF MATERIALS, IN TERMS OF PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC MATERIAL.
MY QUESTION ABOUT WHAT, UH, COMMISSIONER RAR JACKSON HAS JUST SAID IS, I GUESS I'M LOOKING AT KIM AGAIN.
DO, DO WE OR DO WE NOT HAVE THAT ALREADY IN THE ORDINANCE ABOUT THE PRESERVATION OF HISTORIC MATERIAL REGARDLESS OF WHETHER IT'S MADE OUTTA MARSHMALLOWS OR ALUMINUM OR, OR ANYTHING ELSE? I THINK WE DO, BUT I DON'T THINK WE AS A BODY INTERPRET OR, OR THEN IT'S ABOUT OUR POLICY, OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE INFORMATION.
I, I TOOK WHAT COMMISSIONER AUER JACKSON WAS TALKING ABOUT ALMOST MORE IN THE SENSE OF A MISSION STATEMENT AND WHERE YOU'RE REALLY EMPHASIZING THAT IT IS IN THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO REMOVE HISTORIC MATERIALS.
BUT IS THAT A PRIORITY FOR YOU ALL? I, I THINK IT'S WHAT I'M HEARING FROM, SO, SO I HAVE A QUESTION FOR EVERYONE AS ABOUT THIS ISSUE.
THANK AND THANK YOU, UH, STAFF PERSON DE LEON LEON.
IT'S, IT'S GOOD TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION.
IT'S A LOT OF IT IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN BATTING AROUND FOR QUITE A WHILE NOW.
AND, AND YOU, UH, MADE IT AVAILABLE TO US THE DAY BEFORE THE MEETING TODAY.
SO FOR THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THAT.
UM, DID ANY OF IT SURPRISE YOU BY THE WAY? IT DID.
I THOUGHT THAT THERE WOULD'VE BEEN MORE APPEALS.
SO 10 AND YOU KNOW, ABOUT WHAT, LIKE ALMOST EIGHT OR ALMOST SEVEN YEARS WAS PRETTY SURPRISING TO ME.
HOW, HOW LONG HAVE YOU BEEN ON STAFF? I'VE BEEN ON STAFF FOR OVER A YEAR, BUT I WAS AN INTERN, SO YEAR PLUS.
AND SO IT MUST'VE BEEN INTERESTING TO SEE, UH, ROUGHLY SIX YEARS WORTH OF DATA YES.
ESPECIALLY 'CAUSE I WAS AN INTERN BACK IN 2022 AND I GOT TO KIND OF VERY, YOU KNOW, WITH A SMALL GLIMPSE, SEE WHAT THE FUTURE HELD IN WINDOWS.
SO, WELL AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THAT.
UH, BUT IN LIEU OF DESIGN GUIDELINES, WE'RE NOT GONNA RING OUR HANDS ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT WHAT WE'VE GOT.
WE, WE HAVE THE ORDINANCE AND AS IT'S DESCRIBED IN THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANUAL.
AND WHEN I WENT TO THE MOST RECENT APPEALS BOARD MEETING, UH, ABOUT THE SINGLE ITEM ON THEIR AGENDA, IT WAS AN APPEAL OF THE LAST THING THAT WE LOOKED AT IN GLENBURG VALLEY BEFORE THIS MEETING, WHICH WAS, UM, OVERTURNED.
AND AMONG THE DOCUMENTS THAT I PRESENTED WERE, WERE EXCERPTS FROM THIS HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANUAL.
COMMISSIONER WEDO JACKSON ASKED TO LEAVE.
AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
AND IT, IT, I THINK IT FUNCTIONS IT, I THINK IT'S CLEAR AND I THINK IT FUNCTIONS AS A MISSION STATEMENT IF WE NEED THAT.
AND WE CAN PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN.
MAYBE TAKE A MINUTE JUST TO DO THAT SINCE THE APPEALS BOARD SAW IT.
JUST HAND IT OFF MY, UM, MY DOCUMENTS.
BUT YOU, DO YOU SEE THAT I'VE, I'VE OUTLINED THE RELEVANT EXCERPTS.
CLOSER AND BETTER EYES CAN READ IT.
THE BOX WHAT'S IN THE BOX AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PAGE.
[02:35:01]
DURING THIS PERIOD WERE TYPICALLY VERY LARGE WINDOW FRAMES WERE OFTEN MADE OF ALUMINUM.REPLACING THIS WITH WHITE OR LIGHT COLORED VINYL WINDOWS WILL CHANGE THE APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE, THE WINDOW FRAMES RATHER THAN THE WINDOWS WILL DRAW ATTENTION.
IF WINDOW REPLACEMENT IS NECESSARY, SELECT A PRODUCT WITH AN ANUS FRAME THAT WILL NOT CHANGE THE EXTERIOR APPEARANCE OF THE HOUSE.
AND THEN IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, WHICH IS JUST PAGE TWO IN THIS, UH, THE FOLLOWING PAGE OF THE SAME, UM, MANUAL COMMISSIONER CURRY.
IS THIS FOR CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING OR, WE'LL, SECOND DOESN'T SPECIFY.
UNDER THE INCOMP, UH, INCOMPATIBLE SECTION UNDER WINDOWS, MOVE OVER TO THE RIGHT VINYL WHITE FRAME, WHITE FRAME SLASH SASH.
THOSE ARE THE THREE, UH, DESCRIPTIONS OF INCOMPATIBLE MATERIALS.
WE GO BACK TO THAT FOR JUST A SECOND, FOR ANYONE, BE ABLE TO SEE IT.
AND THEN WHAT'S SHOWN IN THE COLUMN FOR COMPATIBLE SAYS ANY SIZE, SHAPE, OR PROPORTION, HORIZONTAL PROPORTIONS DOMINATE ALUMINUM, SINGLE OR DOUBLE PAINT, MINIMAL FRAME STASH.
SO THIS IS DESCRIPTION OF WHAT'S COMPATIBLE, PRESUMABLY ACCEPTABLE AND WHAT'S NOT.
AND THEN THE LAST THING I WANTED TO SHOW, WHICH WAS SHOWN TO THE APPEALS BOARD AT THEIR LAST MEETING, IS ALSO AN EXCERPT FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANUAL.
AND I THINK THIS IS KEY INTO CHE'S QUESTION.
THERE'S A COLUMN ON THE LEFT THAT DESCRIBES OR CATEGORI CATEGORIZES, UH, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES LANDMARKS, PROTECTED LANDMARKS AS ONE CATEGORY.
THE NEXT ONE, HISTORIC DISTRICT NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES AS OPPOSED TO THOSE.
AND THEN THE THIRD CATEGORY, VACANT LOT IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
THERE'S THE DESCRIPTION OF WHAT'S ORDINARY MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR AND WHAT'S REQUIRED COA OR NOT.
AND THERE'S A DESCRIPTION OF ALTERATION, REHABILITATION, RESTORATION AND OR ADDITION, WHAT'S REQUIRED OR NOT.
NEW CONSTRUCTION AND RELOCATION, DEMOLITION.
SO WE GOT THE FOUR POSSIBILITIES OF, OF ACTION TO TAKE SUBMITTED FOR ACROSS THE TOP.
AND THEN THE THREE CATEGORIES THAT APPLY TO WHAT WE REVIEW ON THE LEFT, LEFT COLUMN.
SO FOUR, CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLIES IN THIS CATEGORY OF ALTERATION, REHABILITATION RESTORATION, ADDITION FOR NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES, APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLIES.
I, I DON'T SEE I COULD BE ANY CLEAR OTHER THAN TO DRAW A RED LINE UNDER IT, WHICH IS WHAT I DO.
NEW CONSTRUCTION, UH, NOT APPLICABLE.
RELOCATION, DEMOLITION, OF COURSE, THE DIFFERENCE IS CONTRIBUTING APPROVAL CRITERIA APPLIES NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.
SO I JUST WANTED TO REMIND THAT ALL THAT IS IN BLACK AND WHITE IN THE MANUAL FROM THE ORDINANCE.
I THINK I HAVE, UH, MAYBE ONE GRAPH MORE TO, TO DEMONSTRATE IT WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE PRESENTATION FOR VISIBILITY REASONS.
BUT JUST TO REITERATE KIM'S POINT OF THAT, IT'S ESSENTIALLY BASED OFF OF THE INTERPRETATION OF THE, UH, COMMISSION.
THIS, THIS WAS IN WHAT YOU SENT OUT THOUGH, AS I RECALL THIS, THIS IMAGE WAS TO, TO YOU.
UH, I SENT IT TO THE WINDOWS SUBCOMMITTEE AND THEN IT WAS REMOVED.
I WAS, UH, SUGGESTED THAT IT WAS REMOVED FROM THE PRESENTATION JUST FOR VISIBILITY REASONS.
'CAUSE IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE.
AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S, IT'S HARD TO SEE ON THE SCREEN.
BUT THE MAIN THING I WANTED TO SHOW WAS THE APPROVAL OF, OR THIS SHOWS EVERY SINGLE TYPE OF WINDOW TYPE APPROVED OR DENIED IN SEVEN YEARS.
AND MY POINT WAS TO JUST REITERATE WHAT KIM SAID ABOUT INTERPRETATION OF THE COMMISSION, WE DID HAVE, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE ALUMINUM TO VINYL WINDOWS THAT WERE APPROVED YEARS AGO.
AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING WE NEED TO GO BACK TO.
THIS IS JUST SIMPLY FROM A DATA STANDPOINT.
AND MY, MY JOB HERE IS TO PRESENT IT AS AN ANALYST.
IS THAT, THAT I THINK THAT IS JUST WHAT KIM MEANT IS THAT IT'S JUST BASED OFF OF OUR INTERPRETATION.
SO MY GOAL IS JUST TO BRING THOSE NUMBERS TO HEAD.
AND SO I JUST WANTED JUST TO SHOW THAT, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE THAT WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE, BUT WE HAVE GONE, UH, I GUESS BACK AND FORTH OVER THE PAST SEVEN YEARS.
AND ANYTHING TOO ABOUT THE, THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION MANUAL, THAT IS NOT A DOCUMENT THAT'S ADOPTED BY COUNCIL AS FAR AS BEING OFFICIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES.
SO THERE ARE GENERAL RULES OUT THERE, I THINK, TO HELP RESIDENTS AND APPLICANTS UNDERSTAND WHAT THE COMMISSION MIGHT BE LOOKING FOR.
BUT UNTIL, UM, WE GET DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR ALL THE HISTORIC DISTRICTS, OR THE ONES AT LEAST YOU SEE THE MOST, THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK STAFF REFERS PEOPLE TO THAT AS A START.
BUT I, I GUESS ROMAN, WE, BUT THERE ARE, THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THE ORDINANCE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL, WHICH YOU READ TO
[02:40:01]
US AT OUR LAST MEETING.UM, LIKE A, A WINDOW REPLACEMENT.
LIKE, LIKE YOU READ THE CRITERIA FOR NOT CONTRIBUTING.
AND THAT MAY BE HELPFUL TO REREAD THAT BECAUSE THAT IS AN EFFECT, UM, THAT, THAT PASS IT THAT YOU PRESENTED.
UM, COME ON ROMAN, YOU HAVE IT MEMORIZED.
YEAH, HE, HE, HE, HE HAD TO LOOK IT UP LAST TIME IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE IT MEMORIZED.
BUT YEAH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT OFF TOP OF OUR HAND.
UH, ALL I BROUGHT UNFORTUNATELY WAS JUST THE DATA AND THE NUMBERS.
FOR THE COORS, IS IT POSSIBLE FOR SOMEONE TO DO A QUICK SURVEY AND SEE IF THOSE HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN ACTED ON? I CAN DEFINITELY MAKE TIME.
I, I DON'T WANNA MAKE TOO MUCH WORK, BUT, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE IF THEY ACTUALLY DO REPLACE THE WINDOWS WHEN WE ASK THEM TO.
WELL, SINCE THERE'S ONLY 10 THAT HAVE BEEN TWO APPEALS, I THINK THAT'S DOABLE.
SO I, WELL, I'M SAYING LIKE 22.
YEAH, I'M SAYING ALL OF 'EM AGREE.
I AGREE WITH YOU BECAUSE IT'S A MEASURE OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THIS COMMISSION TO KNOW THAT IF WE ISSUE A C OF R AND ALL 22 APPLICANTS DIDN'T CHANGE THE WINDOWS BACK THEN THAT'S LIKE GETTING THEM OVERTURNED.
THAT'S 22 HOUSES WITH VINYL WINDOWS.
AND WE KNOW FROM OUR APPLICATION TODAY THAT PEOPLE BUY AND SELL HOUSES THERE WITH VERY LITTLE REGARD FOR THE FUTURE OWNER.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WHETHER THERE, THERE WOULD BE A HOLD ON THE PERMIT IN THE FUTURE, IT MAY NOT HAVE MUCH IMPACT, UH, TO THE BUYERS IN THAT COMMUNITY.
BUT IF WE KNOW THAT NUMBER, THEN I THINK IT HELPS US UNDERSTAND GOING FORWARD.
LIKE IF THEY'RE NOT GONNA REPLACE THEM BACK, WHY BOTHER? WHY BOTHER? RIGHT.
THAT SEEMED TO ME A GOOD WAY TO DEAL WITH ALL THE DISTRICTS.
BUT GLENBROOK VALLEY, WHEN THEY MAY HAVE ONE SPECIAL WINDOW, LIKE A STAINED GLASS, LEADED ONE, WHATEVER, AND THEN ALL THE OTHER ONES ARE JUST TYPICAL.
AND EVEN IF THEY'RE ALUMINUM, MAYBE THEY CAN BE REPLACED BECAUSE THEY WERE JUST NORMAL WINDOWS AND THEY'VE, BUT KISS YOUR COUCH TO BE IN FAIRNESS AT CAMP ONE CITY OUTTA MULTIPLE CITIES REPRESENTED, TOOK, TOOK THAT APPROACH.
AND WHEN THEY DID ALLOW WINDOWS TO BE REPLACED, THEY, THEY HAD A VERY PRESCRIPTIVE, A PRESCRIPTIVE REQUIREMENT THAT YOU HAD TO MEET IF YOU DID REPLACE THE WINDOW.
SO YOU, IT WASN'T, YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU WANT.
THEY, THEY, EVEN IN THAT ONE CITY, THEY MADE THAT ALSO VERY CLEAR SURE.
AS WELL AS YOU THINK CAN ROLL THE WAY THAT IT WANTS TO, YOU KNOW? AND SO WITH DISCUSSIONS, HOUSTON CAN FIND THAT CONSENSUS, WHATEVER IT MAY BE.
BUT, UM, YEAH, NO, I I, I WAS SURPRISED NO OTHER CITY DID ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
'CAUSE MAYBE THE PEOPLE IN THE OTHER SEAS WERE MORE CONSCIENTIOUS OR SOMETHING, BUT WE CERTAINLY KNOW THEY'RE NOT HERE.
AND WE'VE ALSO STRUGGLED TO FIND A REPLACEMENT ALUMINUM WINDOW.
WE'VE LOOKED FOR YEARS AND WE FIND ONE AND THEN IT GETS DISCONTINUED AND WE FIND ANOTHER ONE GETS DISCONTINUED.
LIKE IT IS JUST NOT A PRODUCT THAT'S MANUFACTURED, THAT'S ACCESSIBLE.
AND, AND SO, UH, WE COME ACROSS THIS PROBLEM ALL THE TIME OR WE, WE SAY, OH, YOU HAVE TO USE ALUMINUM WINDOWS AND THEN, BUT, BUT, BUT IT IS, BUT IT IS, WE HAVE NOT FOUND A SOURCE, A RELIABLE SOURCE FOR MILL FINISHER.
WE HAVE FOUND FOUR RELIABLE SOURCES FOR, FOR MILL FINISHER, SOMETHING SIMILAR.
PEOPLE HAVE CALLED THEM AND THEY SAY THEY'RE DISCONTINUED OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
CALL THEM YOURSELF AND SEE WHAT THEY SAY.
THATS NOT WHAT THEY SAY ON, THEY SAY THEY'LL SHIP 'EM TO YOU FOR $120 FROM BEAUMONT IN ANY SIZE OR SHAPE OR CONFIGURATION NEED.
THEY HAVE THOSE, THOSE ONES FOR, FOR MOBILE HOMES OR WHATEVER, BUT THOSE ARE ONLY MADE IN CERTAIN SIZES AND THEY DON'T FIT A REGULAR WINDOW.
IT'S, IT'S JUST, JUST NOT THE CASE.
THIS, THERE'S PROOF TO THE CONTRARY.
AND IN FACT, THERE'S PROOF INSTALLED IN HOUSTON TO THE CONTRARY.
IN FACT, THERE'S PROOF INSTALLED IN GLENBROOK VALLEY TO THE CONTRARY.
AND, AND WE KNOW THOSE COSTS AND WE KNOW WHO DOES IT.
WELL, WE, WE KNOW, WE KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME RECENT ALUMINUM TO ALUMINUM WINDOWS FOR NOT CONTRIBUTING, AND THEY PURCHASED THOSE WINDOWS AND THEY WERE SHIPPED AND INSTALLED AND THEY'RE, THEY'RE FROM A HARDWARE STORE, JUST LIKE, JUST LIKE IN THE, IN THE DAYS OF OLD.
BUT I MEAN THAT, UH, ON THAT NOTE, MISS THE CHAIR AND MET 'EM DIRECT DIRECTOR.
I THINK I WANT TO STRESS, AGAIN, WE NEED THIS, UH, WORKSHOP NOT ONLY JUST FOR THE WINDOWS, BUT THE POST CAMP WORKSHOP THAT WE WANT TO GET EVERYBODY ON THE SAME PAGE.
AND SEPARATELY, I THINK WE MAY NEED ANOTHER MINI WORKSHOP JUST FOR THIS WINDOW SO WE CAN ALL GET ON THE SAME PAGE AS WELL.
WELL, AND I THINK ALSO THE CONCEPT OF FALSE PAST IS SOMETHING WE WRESTLE WITH HERE.
AND I'D LIKE TO, I THINK WE SHOULD DISCUSS THAT, UM, AND DISCUSS, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE CONCEPTS ARE AND THEN DIG INTO THAT.
BECAUSE THERE WERE A NUMBER OF, YOU KNOW, WINDOWS WAS PROBABLY, THAT'S OUR BIG ITEM, BUT THERE ARE SOME OTHER ITEMS
[02:45:01]
THAT CAMP, YOU KNOW, INTRODUCE THAT I THINK WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM CONVERSATION AND WITH THE APPEALS BOARD SO THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHERE EVERYONE IS.UM, BUT I, I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER BLAKELY'S NOT HERE, BUT THERE, THE TOWN HALL THAT SHE CREATED WITH RICE UNIVERSITY, UM, SOME OF THE FEEDBACK AS WAS MENTIONED TO US WAS, UM, THAT THE FOLKS IN LIMERICK VALLEY, UM, WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE INFORMATION ON THE WEBSITE.
SO ABOUT ESPECIALLY WINDOWS AND WHAT YOU CAN DO.
AND I KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A REPORT AND THERE EVEN MORE RECENTLY, UM, SOME OF THE, OF THE PAST WINDOW MANUFACTURERS, ALUMINUM DIDN'T MAKE THEM, BUT THERE'S A QUITE A NUMBER OF THEM THAT DO AND RECENTLY CONFIRMED OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
BUT HAVING THAT ON THE WEBSITE WHERE INFORMATION IS ACCESSIBLE, I THINK IS ALSO SOMETHING THAT THE, THAT THE PUBLIC WAS ASKING OF US WOULD MAKE IT EASIER.
UM, ONE PERSON SAID SPECIFICALLY, I DON'T WANT TO CALL STAFF AND ASK THEM FOR MY OPTIONS.
I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT SOMETHING WRITTEN AND PRESENTED ON THE WEBSITE, WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED.
SO I THINK ALL OF THIS STUFF WE, WE'D BENEFIT AND, AND YOUR, YOUR INFORMATION TODAY ALSO HELPS US UNDERSTAND THE TERRAIN.
AND THEN I ALSO JUST WANNA SAY THAT I KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER COUCH DID ASK ABOUT THOSE COORS, AND SO DID COMMISSIONER COSGROVE.
I CAN HAVE THAT INFORMATION READY FOR THE NEXT, UH, HAAC MEETING IF YOU'D LIKE.
AND NOT TO SPLIT SOMETHING THREE WAYS, BUT MY, MY QUESTION FOR LEGAL IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO COME OUT OF THIS DISCUSSION IS, IS CONTRIBUTING, NOT CONTRIBUTING AND CLARITY AND CONSENSUS ON WHAT THE, THE ORDINANCE SAYS AND IF, IF THERE'S A WILL OF THIS COMMISSION TO CHANGE THAT, THAT IF WE MAKE A CHANGE, AS EVERYONE AT CAMP SAID, YOU HAVE TO CHANGE YOUR ORDINANCE IF YOU, IF YOU ADOPT SOMETHING.
AND THE EASIEST WAY TO GET TO THAT PATH IS TO HAVE PUBLIC AND, AND HAVE DIALOGUE AND PUBLIC MEETINGS ON AN AGENDA, UH, AND AND, AND SO ON.
BUT THE OTHER THING IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE A C OF R, THEN THE RULES ARE A LITTLE BIT SIDEWAYS BECAUSE C OF R AREN'T CONSTRAINED BY THE RULES OF A C OF A FOR, SORRY, FOR CONTRIBUTING OR NOT CONTRIBUTING.
WHEN YOU ACT WITHOUT ANY APPROVAL, COMMISSION HAS GREATER DEFERENCE ON WHAT YOU CAN PUT BACK.
AND SO THERE, THEY'RE JUST, THAT'S HARD TO DEFINE.
THAT'S NEVER BEEN DEFINED TO ME, BUT IT'S PART OF WHAT THE CONSENSUS OF THE COMMISSION IS.
AND SOME OF THE, UH, THINGS THAT YOU'RE PRESENTING ARE ALSO, UH, THE RESULT OF C OF R.
AND SO THAT'S ALSO JUST PART OF THIS, UM, WHAT MAKES US CLEAR AS MUD, I THINK, UH, IN PART.
BUT, SO SAMANTHA, AM I TO ASSUME THAT YOU'RE GONNA DRIVE TO THE 22 HOUSES TO SEE WHETHER THEY'RE ACTUALLY DONE WHAT THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO DO?
I WILL PROBABLY ASK JASON TO COME WITH ME, YES.
BUT YES, I WILL NOT BE ALONE, BUT I THINK WITH TWO PEOPLE IT'S DEFINITELY DOABLE.
NO, BUT SHE MIGHT TAKE GOOGLE THAT IS THE MODUS OF GRANDE THAT YOU PHYSICALLY HAVE TO GO TO THE HOUSE.
I WILL PHYSICALLY GO TO EVERY HOUSE.
IT'S NICE WEATHER OUTSIDE, SO AT LEAST THIS IS NOT, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUNE.
WE, WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
CHAIR, ONE LAST PIECE IS THAT BEFORE YOUR LAST THING RELATED TO FOLLOW UP TO COMMISSIONER YA'S QUESTION.
SO YOU'RE GONNA GET IT NEXT MONTH.
WHAT, WHAT, UH, BESIDES YOUR, YOUR BOOTS, BOOTS ON THE GROUND, THANK YOU, UH, VERY MUCH.
WHAT, WHAT IMPETUS IS THERE FOR FOLLOW THROUGH? I MEAN, WHAT, WHAT, WHY, WHY WOULD THEY, WHY WOULD THE, WHY WOULD, WHY WOULD WHAT WE HOPE TO SEE WHEN YOU TOUR THOSE 22 HOUSES HAPPEN? I MEAN, THIS, THERE'S NO, YOU'RE GONNA DO IT BECAUSE WE'VE ASKED YOU TO THANK AND WE DO THANK YOU.
BUT, BUT WOULD OTHERWISE, WOULD IT BE DONE, DOES, DOES SPEAK STOCKTON OR IS THERE ANY METHODOLOGY FOR ANYBODY ELSE TO SEE THAT? NO, I THINK, UH, USUALLY WE, IN RECENTLY, FOR EXAMPLE, I'VE BEEN HELPING JASON, UH, RESURVEY IN OLD SIX WARD.
THIS IS, YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT THE SECOND TIME THAT IT'S BEEN SURVEYED SINCE THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED, RIGHT? OR BEEN SURVEYED IN 14 YEARS, HAS NOT BEEN SURVEYED IN 14 YEARS.
SO ESSENTIALLY THERE'S NOT REALLY ANY, I GUESS, PROCEDURE TO GO AND CHECK ON THESE HOUSES.
IT'S JUST WHEN WE DO RE RESERVING, ARE WE ABLE TO GO AND SEE WHETHER OR NOT, IF IT WAS DONE, YEAH, I WAS GONNA SUGGEST THAT AS PART OF A C OF R MAYBE YOU ALL MAKE IT A CONDITION AND WE EVENTUALLY GET IT INTO THE ORDINANCE THAT IF A C OF R IS GRANTED THEY MUST SUBMIT PROOF OF COMPLIANCE WITHIN X MONTHS A YEAR.
I DON'T, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE WOULD LAND ON, BUT, UM, FROM MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S NO TIMETABLES FOR COORS.
SO CR CAN BE, YOU KNOW, ISSUED AND THEN IF THEY DON'T EVER APPLY FOR ANOTHER PERMIT, SO YOU, YOUR SURVEY MIGHT COME BACK WITH A CATEGORY FOR NOT YET, CORRECT? YES,
[02:50:01]
YES.AND THEN JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT THIS IS THE ONLY, UH, DATA SET THAT IS BEING REQUESTED FOR NEXT MONTH.
I, IT'S NOT A PROBLEM IF I NEED TO PULL ANY OF ANYTHING ELSE.
I, I FEEL LIKE WE'VE MOVED ON TO, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION INTERRUPT POSITION, PLEASE.
I JUST, JUST ONE LAST THING TO, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE APPEALS BOARD DECISION ON OVERTURNING OURS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT IS IN THE, UH, ORDINANCE, WHAT YOU CITED LAST MONTH ABOUT REPLACING WINDOWS, WHAT WE READ OUTTA THE, OR ORDINANCE, THE APPEALS BOARD BASED, THEIR DECISION ON ANOTHER FACTOR ENTIRELY.
SO JUST MAKE SURE THAT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING, THEY BASED IT ON ANOTHER FACTOR ENTIRELY AND NOT SUPPORTED BY THE ORDINANCE.
SO THAT, THAT IS TROUBLING TO ME.
BUT I WAS, BUT I DID FIND SOME COMFORT THAT THEY ASKED US TO GIVE THEM MORE DESCRIPTIVE.
LIKE FOR INSTANCE, IF, IF IT NEEDS TO, YOU KNOW, LOOK LIKE ALUMINUM, RIGHT? I MEAN THE ORDINANCE DOESN SAY IT HAS TO BE ALUMINUM, BUT IT HAS TO LOOK LIKE ALUMINUM.
AND RIGHT NOW VINYL DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ALUMINUM.
SO RIGHT NOW THEY SAID IF WE, IF THE CONSENSUS OF THIS BODY WAS TO SAY THAT A REPLACEMENT WINDOW WAS ALUMINUM, THAT WOULD HELP THEM IN THEIR DECISION MAKING, RIGHT? BUT THERE WERE SOME OTHER ASPECTS THAT THEY STATED WHICH WERE TROUBLING THAT I DIDN'T FIND SUPPORTED BY THE ORDINANCE.
BUT ALL OF THAT COULD BE DISCUSSED IN AN OPEN MEETING, OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND WE COULD TRY TO FIND CONSENSUS, ESPECIALLY ON NON, NON-CONTRIBUTING HOUSES CORRECT BASIS FOR THEIR DECISION.
YES, IT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS.
SO YES, BECAUSE THERE'S, IN THE ORDINANCE, THERE'S LANGUAGE FOR NON CONTRIBUTING, WHETHER YOU TEAR IT DOWN AND REPLACE IT, THERE'S SOME, THERE'S SOME REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO ABIDE BY IF YOU REPLACE YOUR HOME AND IF YOU'RE NOT CONTRIBUTING AND YOU WANNA RENOVATE YOUR HOME, OUR ORDINANCE DOES SET SOME GUIDELINES OR REQUIREMENTS FOR THAT.
AND THEY DID NOT SEEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
SO THAT WAS THE TROUBLING PART.
THE REASON TO HAVE THIS MEETING POST HASTE.
I, I THINK WE, WE SHOULDN'T KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD.
AND I THINK THE TIMETABLE THAT WAS SET UP SOUNDS GOOD.
UM, RIGHT FEBRUARY, JANUARY, FEBRUARY.
UM, SO I'M GONNA CLOSE ITEM B AND MOVE ON TO, UH, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND THANK YOU.
I KNOW WE THANK YOU SAM VERY MUCH.
I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE ANY COMMENTS TODAY, ONE OR TWO.
BUT PLEASE RESTATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD.
HI, AMANDA REYNOLDS, PRESIDENT OF THE NORTH HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION.
UM, I THINK THAT, UM, WE ALL KNOW THAT WE'RE THE THREE BODIES THAT ARE PROTECTING, HISTORICALLY PROTECTING NOR HILL, UM, NOR HILL DEED RESTRICTIONS, HHC AND HOP.
AND WE SOMETIMES HAVE DIFFERENCES OPINION, AND THAT HAPPENS AND THAT'S WHY I PUSH FOR THE GUIDELINES.
I'M EXCITED TO GET THOSE THROUGH.
UM, BUT WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT WAS, UM, TODAY SOMETHING UNUSUAL HAPPENED IN THAT A PROPERTY WAS APPROVED THAT GOES INDIRECT VIOLATION OF OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, SO, UM, 1115 WEST GARDNER, UM, VIOLATES ARTICLE TWO, SECTION FOUR OF OUR DEED RESTRICTIONS, WHICH GIVES US 60 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE FRONT FOR I QUOTE, DETACHED GARAGES OUT BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES APART FROM THE RESIDENCE.
UM, THE, THE SETBACK WAS LESS THAN 45 FEET FROM THE FRONT.
SO I WANTED TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY RAMIFICATIONS FOR A DIRECT VIOLATION.
YOUR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPROVAL DOES NOT OVERRIDE OR ALTER DEED RESTRICTIONS.
IF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ARE VALID, THEY WILL NEED TO GET THROUGH PERMITTING WITH THOSE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
IF THAT WILL REQUIRE SOME CHANGE TO THE C OF A.
IT COULD COME BACK TO YOU IF IT HAS TO RESULT IN, IN STRUCTURAL CHANGES, BUT YEAH.
IS THERE THIS, THIS IS MORE OF A DESIGN ISSUE.
IF THEY CAN PUSH EVERYTHING BACK FURTHER, GREAT.
IT SOUNDS LIKE IT MIGHT BE GREAT AND COMPLY, BUT, UM, WITHOUT RECALLING WHICH THOSE WERE.
SORRY, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WHAT DID YOU, WHAT DO YOU MEAN? WELL, IF, IF IT'S, IF IT'S A 45 FOOT SETBACK, IF THEY CAN PUSH SOMETHING BACK ON THEIR LOT, IT MAY NOT REQUIRE, THEY CAN'T, IT'S, YEAH, IT MAY JUST, IT MAY NOT REQUIRE COMING BACK HERE, BUT AS FAR AS THE C OF A, BUT IF, IF, IF THEY'RE VALID DEED RESTRICTIONS, THEY'LL HAVE TO GET THROUGH PERMITTING ON THAT.
UM, I KNOW THAT WHEN YOU AN APPLICANT APPLIES, THEY SIGN, THEY, THERE'S A FORM
[02:55:01]
THAT SAYS THEY MEET DE RESTRICTIONS AND THAT YOU SIGN, YOU SIGNED THAT SAYS SAY DON'T VIOLATE DEED RESTRICTIONS.AND, UM, UM, SO YOU ALMOST ANYONE CAN SAY WHAT THEY WANT.
IT'S KIND OF, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT GETS RESOLVED.
UM, I JUST WANTED TO BRING IT TO YOUR ATTENTION.
IT WAS AN UNUSUAL SITUATION THAT YOU GUYS WENT IN VIOLATION OF US.
SO IT DOESN'T CONTRADICT DEED RESTRICTION.
IT DOES, IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING TO VIOLATE YOUR DEED RESTRICTION.
IT DOES NOT OVERRIDE YOUR DEED RESTRICTIONS.
IF THEY ARE VALID, ARE STILL VALID.
IF THERE'S AN ISSUE AT PERMITTING THE RESOLUTION FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I KNOW YOU ALL ARE VERY ACTIVE, UM, THE RESOLUTION IS TO FILE A DEED RESTRICTION ENFORCEMENT COMPLAINT, UM, THROUGH, THROUGH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT OFFICE, THROUGH NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES.
AND THEN THEY WILL ENFORCE THAT MIKE STANDING HERE, MICROPHONE, YOU KNOW, THAT WE DON'T KNOW YOUR DEED.
WE CAN IMAGINE MAYBE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW YOUR DE RESTRICTIONS.
I MEAN, AND SO, AND THAT'S WHY I JUST WANNA MAKE A POINT AND SOMEONE CAN SHUT ME DOWN IF, BUT MY, MY OPINION, I THINK OF ALL OF OURS IS THAT IT BOLSTERS, UH, UH, SUBMITTAL HERE FROM AN APPLICANT.
IF WE KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN TO YOU, FOR INSTANCE, AND THAT, THAT THEY CAN, YOU CAN, THEY CAN PROVIDE A LETTER IDEALLY THAT SAYS THAT YOU REVIEWED IT AND, AND IT'S OKAY WITH YOU MEETS ALL THE DE RESTRICTIONS THAT BOLSTERS THE CASE.
I'M SURE STAFF WORKS TO GET THAT IN INCLUDED.
BUT IF IT'S NOT THERE, UM, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, IT CAN'T COUNT AGAINST THEM BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW YOUR DUE RESTRICTIONS.
AND WE CAN'T, I DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN REQUIRE THEM TO SUBMIT TO YOU ALL AS WE HOPE THEY DO.
BUT, SO YEAH, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THERE'S A, IT WAS A RELATIONSHIP, A TRIANGULAR RELATIONSHIP.
WE'RE ALL TRYING FOR THE SAME THING.
THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY.
BUT I WOULD SAY I WOULD STILL, THIS WAS A PROJECT THAT WASN'T, WHEN I CALLED FOR PULLING PROJECTS OUT FOR INITIAL CON CONSIDERATION WASN'T PULLED OUT.
IT WAS, IT WAS LEFT IN CON CONSENT AND IT WAS UNFORTUNATELY MISLABELED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND, AND THAT WAS MENTIONED EARLIER.
UM, BUT THAT I WOULD CERTAINLY WOULD RECOMMEND ANYTIME TIME, YOU KNOW, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S PART OF OUR PURVIEW.
IT WAS JUST MISSED 'CAUSE IT WAS MISLABELED.
IS ANYONE ELSE? BUT THE ADDRESS WAS CORRECT.
HELLO AGAIN, VIRGINIA, KELSEY, UM, NOR HILL DEED RESTRICTIONS.
UM, EVERY FRIDAY BEFORE YOU BRING THINGS UP, I CHECK THE LIST AND I SAW NOR HILL AND I SAW, ACTUALLY IT WAS WEST GARDNER AND I THOUGHT, WELL, IS THAT US? AND I LOOKED, NOTHING HAD BEEN SUBMITTED TO US.
I CHECKED ON GOOGLE MAPS AND A DIFFERENT GARDENER CAME UP IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
SO I NEVER WENT BACK AND CHECKED ONCE IT WAS PUT UP MONDAY OR TUESDAY, THE INFORMATION, BECAUSE I ASSUMED Y'ALL DON'T USUALLY MISLABEL.
AND YOU CAUGHT IT AFTER YOU HAD ALREADY BEEN IN THE PROCESS AND IT WAS LABELED AS, UH, WINDOWS INSIDING.
AND I ASSUMED IT WAS SOMETHING SIMPLE AND BY THE TIME IT WAS APPROVED, BY THE TIME I COULD PULL IT UP ON MY PHONE.
AND I THINK IT GOES TO SHOW WHAT, I SEEM TO COME HERE EVERY MONTH AND BE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THING.
AND THAT IS THAT PEOPLE COME TO YOU BEFORE THEY COME TO US.
AND I WOULD REQUEST AS A POLICY FOR THE DEPARTMENT, IF THEY COULD JUST INFORM US WHAT PROJECTS COME BEFORE YOU.
WE'RE NEVER GONNA BE AS, AS AMANDA SAID, WE'RE NOT ALWAYS GONNA AGREE.
YOU'RE GONNA HAVE DIFFERENCES.
THAT'S WE, WE EACH HAVE A LITTLE DIFFERENT AGENDA.
BUT IF WE COULD AT LEAST BE INFORMED SO THAT WE'RE NOT SITTING THERE TRYING AT THE LAST MINUTE.
'CAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS WE KNOW THAT THERE'S THE FORM ON THE CITY, BUT THE CITY DOES NOT ENFORCE MANY ASPECTS OF DEED RESTRICTIONS.
THEY CAN'T LOOK FOR THE THOUSANDS OF SUBDIVISIONS.
THAT'S NOT REALISTIC FOR THEM.
I WOULD LIKE THE CITY TO ADOPT THAT.
THEY HAD TO HAVE A LETTER THAT USED TO BE THE POLICY.
IT NEEDS TO GO BACK TO WHAT THE POLICY WAS.
IF WE COULD HAVE THAT AS A POLICY THAT THEY HAVE A LETTER OR HAVE A TIMEFRAME.
IF A LETTER IS NOT SUBMITTED WITHIN MOTION TO GRANT THE FEE ONE MORE TIME, A SECOND, SECOND WITHIN ALL IN FAVOR, WITHIN, YOU KNOW, 30 DAYS OR SOMETHING, THAT IT WOULD GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, YOU KNOW, THERE.
'CAUSE NOT EVERY DEED RESTRICTION OR, OR SUBDIVISION IS, IS, UM, ON BOARD LIKE WE ARE.
AND SO THAT IS MY ASK IS WE TRY TO WORK TOGETHER BETTER AND
[03:00:01]
THAT WE ARE NOTIFIED BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE USING THE PROCESS TO GO AND GET THEIR, THEIR, THEIR PERMITS.AND THEN OUR ONLY RECOURSE IS TO GO BACK TO THEM OR FILE A LAWSUIT.
THE SPEAKER BRINGS UP A POINT THAT, YOU KNOW, I SPOKE ON THE, THE FIRST SPEAKER'S COMMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES SECTION WILL ONLY ENFORCE, I'M GONNA SAY FIVE OR SIX ELEMENTS THAT INDEED RESTRICTIONS THAT CITIES WITHOUT ZONING MAY DO.
WE, OF COURSE, HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS ZONING.
SO IT'S A LITTLE, WE'RE WE'RE IN A LITTLE INTERESTING AREA HERE.
UM, BUT AESTHETICS IS NOT ONE OF THEM.
SO FROM A DESIGN STANDPOINT, IT'S NOT ONE OF THEM.
THEY WILL ENFORCE THINGS LIKE SETBACKS, UM, OR CLEAR HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AND SO FORTH.
AND SO THAT COULD BE AN AREA FOR POTENTIAL CONFLICT TOO.
I DO HAVE A QUESTION NOW FOR PRESERVATION STAFF.
SO FROM THE TIME OF AN APPLICANT SENDS IN AN APPLICATION TO THE TIME APPEARING IN FRONT OF US, HOW MUCH TIME IS THAT? WEEKS, MONTHS? IT DEPENDS.
WELL, THE, THE, THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES THAT ONCE AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN DEEMED COMPLETE, I BELIEVE IT HAS TO BE HEARD BY THIS COMMISSION WITHIN 45 DAYS IS I BELIEVE THE, THE EXACT NUMBER.
I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME.
UM, SO, BUT COMPLETENESS IS OFTEN AN ISSUE.
SO WE MIGHT, WE HAVE A LOT OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS EVERY MONTH, SOMETIMES EVEN BY THE ACTUAL DEADLINE THAT'S POSTED.
SOMETIMES IT'S DOESN'T HAVE A PAYMENT OF THE C OF A APPLICATION FEE.
SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T HAVE A SIGN UP.
SOMETIMES THE DRAWINGS AREN'T DETAILED ENOUGH TO COM TO UNDERSTAND THE, THE PROPOSAL.
SO WE WORK WITH THE APPLICANTS, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'RE PRETTY CLOSE TO THE MARK, YOU KNOW, THEN WE WANT TO GET 'EM, WE, WE, WE DON'T HARDLY ENFOR LIKE WITH A REAL HARD LINE ENFORCE THE, UH, THE INPUT DATE, YOU KNOW, IF SOMEONE'S PUTTING THOSE.
BUT, BUT THE ANSWER, SO LEGALLY, ONCE WE HAVE A APPLICATION, IT'S, IT'S ON THE NEXT AGENDA, WHATEVER THAT IS.
AND LEGALLY I THINK IT HAS TO BE 45 DAYS.
YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DETERMINATION.
YES, ONCE WE'VE SAID IT'S COMPLETE, BUT IT REALLY ISN'T COMPLETE UNTIL THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING SAYS IT'S COMPLETE.
SO WE KNOW WE DON'T WANT, UH, TO HAVE A PROJECT THAT WE DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND.
SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO FORWARD UNTIL WE KNOW WE AS A STAFF, WE REVIEW THE APPLICATION.
BUT SOMETIMES STAFF WILL SAY, WHERE'S THE SITE PLAN? I DUNNO WHERE THAT IS ON THE, WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND IT, THEN WE WILL TAKE IT FORWARD FROM THERE.
WELL, I MEAN, THE POINT THAT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT, UH, MS. KELSEY'S, UH, REQUEST IS, IS REASONABLE IF, IF THEY SAY THAT THEY HAVE AN APPLICATION FROM NOR HILL THAT COMES TO YOU TODAY.
AND EVEN IF YOU, WE PLAY, WE ARE ALL IN THE SAME GROUP AND YOU INFORM HER, SHE HAS 30 DAYS TO RECEIVE A LETTER TO INFORM HER SO SHE CAN OH, COMPLETELY REASONABLE APPROPRIATELY.
A HUNDRED PERCENT SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT WE, WE, WE CHECK WITH STAFF AND ROUTINELY AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING.
WE, IF WE HAVE YOU CHECKED, WE'LL ASK 'EM, HAVE YOU GONE TO NOR HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION? DO YOU KNOW THAT THERE'S DEED RESTRICTIONS THERE? UM, BUT UH, SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CHOOSING NOT TO.
BUT, UM, YEAH, AND I KNOW MOST PEOPLE THE PAST, MANY YEARS AGO, I KNOW LIKE LITTLE SIX WARD HAD A VERY, UH, VIBRANT COMMITTEE AND, UM, IT WAS PRETTY CUSTOMARY THAT A MEMBER STAFF WOULD CHECK WITH THEM BEFORE THEY GOT, THEY GOT HERE.
SO WE, WHETHER THEY SHOWED UP IN PERSON OR NOT, WE SORT OF, WE SORT OF KNEW WHERE THEY STOOD AND IT, IT HELPED INFORM THE COMMISSION JUST TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND, OR, OR DR.
LONGMEYER OFTEN COMES IF THERE'S A PROJECT IN HIS AREA, BUT EVEN IF THEY'RE NOT HERE, JUST KNOWING THAT SOMEONE'S TOUCHED BASE WITH THE FOLKS THAT ARE ACTIVE, THERE'RE NOT THAT MANY ACTIVE ORGANIZATIONS OUT THERE THAT ARE SUPPORTING US.
SO I THINK YASMINE WANTS TO ANSWER.
YOU SAID STAFF, SO YOU'RE SURE.
UM, SO I WAS KIND OF THE OLDEST PERSON WORKING HERE FOR SOME TIME WHO IS POD AND LIKE CHECKS INBOX.
I REMEMBER WHEN I FIRST STARTED HERE, UM, WE, WE USED TO GET AN EMAIL IN THE PD INBOX, UM, FROM NOR HILL.
I'M, I'M, I'M, I'M THINKING DIFFERENT PEOPLE, UH, WITH A LIST OF THE PROJECTS THAT THEY REVIEWED AND THEIR RECOMMENDATION.
THAT IS MY, THAT'S WHAT I REMEMBER, UH, WAS USUALLY WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS.
WE, EVERY MONTH WE, WE GET THAT THESE ARE THE ITEMS THAT ARE REVIEWED.
UM, WE HAVE THE PUBLIC NOTICE SIGN PHOTO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT SIGN IS UP.
AND THEN PRESERVATION TRACKER, UM, DOES HAVE A LIST OF ALL THE, UM, PROPERTIES THAT ARE APPLYING FOR APPLICATIONS.
AND WE DOUBLE CHECKED THAT ITEM.
THAT WAS, UM, THAT HAD THE WRONG, UH,
[03:05:01]
DISTRICT AS A TYPO WAS CORRECT ON PRESERVATION TRACKER.SO WHEN SOMEONE SUBMITS AN APPLICATION, EVEN IF IT'S INCOMPLETE, ISN'T IT AVAILABLE FOR EVERYONE, THE PUBLIC TO SEE ON TRACKER? YES.
EVEN IF IT'S INCOMPLETE, THEY CAN, THERE'S A, THERE'S A SECTION WHERE YOU DON'T HAVE TO USE A USERNAME AND PASSWORD.
YOU JUST, UM, SEARCH BY YOU SEARCH ADDRESS IF YOU WANT AND, AND, AND LOOK IT UP.
AND I, I DO WANNA SAY LIKE WE DO WITH EVERY APPLICATION, IT, UM, WE ALWAYS ENCOURAGE APPLICANTS TO GO AND CHECK WITH THEIR CIVIC ASSOCIATION, WHETHER IT'S NOR HILL OR ANY OTHER CIVIC ASSOCIATION THAT WE KNOW OF.
BUT, UM, IT IS IT, WHEN, WHEN THEY SAY WE WANNA COME TO YOU FIRST, WE DON'T, UM, WE CAN'T TELL THEM, NO, WE DON'T WANNA TAKE IT.
BUT WE ENCOURAGE THEM TO GET THE, THE APPROVAL OF THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION TO MAKE LIFE EASIER FOR THEM WHERE THEY HAVE THE APPROVAL OF BOTH.
SO THE, THE NOR HILL CIVIC ASSOCIATION COULD POTENTIALLY TYPE IN NOR HILL AND LOOK AT TRACKER AND SORT BY DATE TO SEE WHAT THE MOST RECENT APPLICATIONS ARE.
NO, YOU CAN'T IN THE ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE TO, BUT YOU HAVE TO KNOW THE STREET ADDRESS ALREADY.
YOU CAN'T JUST DO IT BY HISTORIC DISTRICT.
AND OF COURSE, WE ARE WORKING ON PRESERVATION TRACKER, THE NEW ONE.
IT HAS BEEN GOING ON FOR TWO YEARS.
WE HAVE BRUTAL LONG MEETINGS, UH, TESTING IT RIGHT NOW.
UM, SO THE NEW TRACKER SHOULD MAKE THINGS MUCH EASIER, HAS A PLACE FOR THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION COMMENT.
UM, WE'RE HOPEFUL IT'S A LOT OF WORK, BUT WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT IT'S GONNA BE BENEFICIAL, EASIER FOR STAFF AND EASIER FOR THE PUBLIC AND APPLICANTS.
AND ONCE IT STARTS THE TESTING PHASE FOR, UM, APPLICANTS, WE WILL ALSO UPDATE THE COMMISSION.
YOU YASMINE, MY, MY CONCERN IS NOT THE, THE COORDINATION OF THE TRIANGLE HERE.
MY, MY CONCERN IS ACTUALLY THE APPLICANT WANT TO CIRCUMVENT A DEED RESTRICTION.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT CIVIC ASSOCIATION, BUT THE DEED RESTRICTION SEEMS TO BE A KEY THING, LIKE, LIKE WHAT MS. MICKELSON HAS SAID.
SO, BUT THERE ARE SOME APPLICANTS MAY, EVEN THOUGH YOU SAID, ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO TO THE CIVIC ASSOCIATION, THEY MAY NOT WANT TO DO SO BECAUSE THEY WANNA CIRCUMVENT THEM.
SO MY POINT IS THAT HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT CIRCUMVENTED? BECAUSE I DON'T WANT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, LIKE THIS GARDNER PROJECT TO GO ALL THE WAY TO PERMITTING, AND THEN IT GETS SHOT BACK ALL THE WAY HERE BECAUSE OH, NOW THERE'S A DEED RESTRICTION THAT SAY 60 FEET AND NOW WE COME TO THIS COMMISSION A SECOND TIME.
DESIGN GUIDELINES HELP WITH THAT.
AND THEN WE, WE STAFF, WHEN WE KNOW A DEED RESTRICTION, WHEN WE KNOW, WHEN WE HAVE CLEAR DE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE KNOW THAT IS BLACK AND WHITE AND NOT DESIGNED LIKE, UH, KIM IS SAYING, WE DO LET THEM KNOW, HEY, BY THE WAY, NOEL DOES NOT APPROVE THIS AND THAT, AND I'M, I'M ONLY GIVING EXAMPLE OF NOEL.
UM, BUT WHEN WE KNOW THAT THEY ARE IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS, WE DO LET THEM KNOW, HEY, THIS WILL NOT BE APPROVED BY, BY NOR HILL.
BUT IF THEY SAY WE STILL CHOOSE TO GO WITH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AS FAR AS STAFF KNOWS, WE CAN'T TELL THEM NO.
THE INTERESTING PART ABOUT DEED RESTRICTIONS WITH ZONING IS THAT IF YOU HAVE ZONING, YOU CAN'T ENFORCE DEED RESTRICTIONS.
SO THE SUPREME COURT PUT US IN AN INTERESTING POSITION SINCE HISTORIC PRESERVATION IS ZONING AND THERE'S A DEED RESTRICTION ISSUE.
IF I CAN, THIS IS A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
SO WE CAN ALWAYS BRING THIS BACK AND TALK ABOUT IT.
BUT I THINK WE SEGUED AND HAVE, SORRY, CAN I MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT? UM, STILL OPEN, PLEASE.
MY ONLY COMMENT IS THERE'S 840 PROPERTIES IN NOR HILL.
IT'S SORT OF NOT REASONABLE TO GO AROUND EVERY WEEK AND FIND OUT WHAT'S NEW AND HOW LONG HAS THAT BEEN THERE, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME COAS THAT HAVE BEEN THERE A LONG TIME AND WE REALIZE THAT THE HOMEOWNER ISN'T GONNA ALWAYS COME TO US, BUT IF THE DEPARTMENT COULD SEND US A NOTIFICATION THAT WE RECEIVE THIS APPLICATION, THAT'S REALLY ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR.
AND I THINK ROMAN SAID HE THOUGHT HE COULD DO THAT.
I'M NOT SURE THAT'S A, THAT'S A DECISION I THINK BETWEEN IN FOR BUSINESS HERE WITH, WITH THE, WITH THE STAFF.
SO, BUT NOT THE PURVIEW OF THIS GROUP.
UM, I THINK WE'VE SEGUED INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION AND RUN THROUGH THAT.
SO WITH, WITH THAT, UM, I'M GONNA CLOSE ITEM D AND I'M GONNA MOVE ON ROMAN TO ITEM E, HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER'S REPORT.
I DO, I JUST DON'T, I FURTHER, I'M GONNA STATE THIS HERE SO I DON'T FORGET, BUT STAFF, WHEN WE MEET WITH HPT, LET'S ASK THEM IF THEY CAN'T HAVE AN OPTION WHERE
[03:10:01]
A MEMBER OF THE, A RESIDENT OF THE CITY CAN PUT IN FOR A, TO HAVE THE SYSTEM, SEND THEM A NOTICE WHEN AN APPLICATION'S A PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, LET'S JUST OKAY, GOOD.BECAUSE IT IS A REALLY STRONG TOOL.
IT'S EXCITING ACTUALLY THINKING NOW, BECAUSE THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'LL MAKE, UH, FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION ARE ACTUALLY GONNA BE GO STRAIGHT ON TO THE DRAFT REPORT.
UM, SO THIS IS SOMETHING REALLY GOOD TO TALK ABOUT.
IT'S FINALLY GETTING, AT LEAST FROM WHAT WE'RE SEEING SOMEWHERE.
UH, WE HAD MEETINGS FOUR YEARS AGO WITH A CONSULTANT TO DRAFT THE RFP OR Q TO GET THE THIS DONE.
AND I SAID BACK THEN, AFTER, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH VERY LITTLE STAFF ON THESE REPORTS FOR A FEW MONTHS, THAT THIS TOOL HAS TO DANCE AND SING AND PRODUCE THE AGENDA AND PRODUCE THE REPORT.
I DON'T WANNA DO ANY OF THAT ANYMORE.
UH, AND WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TO MEET WITH HIM, IT WAS BEGINNING TO LOOK LIKE IT WASN'T GONNA DO THAT.
AND SO WE LAID DOWN THE, WE MAYBE I'LL MISS SOMETHING.
I MEAN, THIS IS SIMPLE TECHNOLOGY.
SO THEY'RE WORKING ON IT AND THEY'RE GETTING IT THERE.
AND, AND, AND, UH, YASMINE AND THE OTHER STAFF HAVE PUSHED VERY HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROVIDER IS GONNA PRODUCE A, A, A TOOL FOR THE CITY TO USE.
IT'S ALSO THE SAME TOOL BE USING, UH, FOR PLATTING SERVICES, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT UP, IS IT AN OUTSOURCED, UH, A CONSULTANT? YES.
AN OUTSOURCED CONSULTANT, YES.
THAT'S PROVIDING SERVICES TO THE CITY? YES.
AND THE CURRENT ONE WAS BUILT IN-HOUSE.
SO THE, JUST IN TERMS OF A COUPLE THINGS, ONE, I WILL HOPE WE CAN CARRY, CONTINUE AND CARRY THE, UH, EXCITEMENT ABOUT TALKING ABOUT WINDOWS TO THAT MEETING.
WE'RE GOING TO GET YOU A POLL OUT TO ALL OF YOU GUYS, ALL OF THE COMMISSIONERS HERE IN HPAB TO MEET BETWEEN THE JANUARY AND THE FEBRUARY MEETING OF, OF THIS COMMISSION.
HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET IT ON CALENDAR AT THE, HOPEFULLY AT THE CASTILLO CENTER OVER ON THE NORTH SIDE IS WHERE WE'RE LOOKING.
AND WE'LL SEND THOSE DATES FINALLY.
AND ALSO, I WANT TO ADD, I'M REALLY THANKFUL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS FOR ANY, ANYBODY, DR.
LONGMEYER, UH, CALLING HIM OUT TODAY, THE PEOPLE WHO SHOW UP FROM THE COMMUNITY TO SPEAK.
IT'S VERY, UH, VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT AS STAFF, I WANNA SAY ON THE NOR HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES.
THE NEXT PUBLIC MEETING, UH, FOR THAT IS DECEMBER THE 18TH.
YOU CAN GO TO LET'S TALK HOUSTON AND SEE DETAILS.
ALSO, THERE'LL BE ANOTHER MEETING IN JANUARY FOR THE OLD SIXTH WAR DESIGN GUIDELINES.
WE'VE CLOSED A PERIOD OF PUBLIC INPUT AND WE'RE, UH, WE'RE REVISING THE DRAFT AND WE'LL HAVE THAT BACK UP.
UH, AND JUST ALSO JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT PRESERVATION HOUSTON IS, IS WORKING STILL ON A REAL ESTATE COURSE, WHICH IS EXCITING FOR, TO HELP, UH, WITH SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS.
AND OTHER THAN THAT, I'D JUST SAY HAPPY HOLIDAYS AND THANK YOU.